Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-09-20 CorrespondenceDate: September 1,2005 To: City Clerk A~I]' From: Anissa Williams, JCCOG Traffic Engineering Planner Re: Item for September 20, 2005 City Council meeting: Installation of LANE CONTROL sign designating existing left lane a LEFT TURN ONLY lane on Rohret Road at the intersection of Mormon Trek Blvd. As directed by Title 9, Chapter 1, Section 3B of the City Code, this is to advise the City Council of the following action. Action: Pursuant to Section 9-1-3A(8), Install LANE CONTROL sign and LEFT TURN YIELD ON GREEN BALL sign designating existing left lane a LEFT TURN ONLY lane on Rohret Road at the intersection of Mormon Trek Blvd. Comment: This action is being taken to clarify traffic control at the intersection. jccogtp/mem/actcomm-MormRohret.doc Date: September 6, 2005 To: City Clerk From: Anissa Williams, JCCOG Traffic Engineering Planner ~ Re: Item for September 20, 2005 City Council meeting: Removal of two parking meters in the 300 block of S. Dubuque Street. Installation of NO PARKING 2 AM to 6 AM TOW AWAY ZONE LOADING ZONE 15 MINUTE LIMIT 7 AM - 6 PM signs As directed by Title 9, Chapter 1, Section 3B of the City Code, this is to advise the City Council of the following action. Action: Pursuant to Section 9-1-3A(17) and 9-1-3A(18), Remove two parking meters; D310S and D303S in the 300 block of South Dubuque Street. Install two NO PARKING 2 AM to 6 AM TOW AWAY ZONE LOADING ZONE 15 MINUTE LIMIT 7 AM - 6 PM signs in place of the parking meters. Comment: This action is being taken at the request of the Appletree Child Care Center and has been approved by the Transit Manager. This is being done to accommodate pick up and drop off of children at the child care center. The loading zone time limit is established from 7 AM to 6 PM to be consistent with the hours of operation of Appletree Child Care Center. jccogtp/mem/actcomm-300Dubuquemeters.doc Date: September 6, 2005 To: City Clerk From: Anissa Williams, JCCOG Traffic Engineering Planner ~ Re: Item for September 20, 2005 City Council meeting: Installation of NO PARKING 2 AM - 6 AM TOW AWAY ZONE signs As directed by Title 9, Chapter 1, Section 3B of the City Code, this is to advise the City Council of the following action. Action: Pursuant to Section 9-1-3A(10), install two NO PARKING 2 AM - 6 AM TOW AWAY ZONE signs on the west side of the 300 block of South Dubuque Street. Comment: This action is being taken to be consistent with the metered areas in the Central Business District to allow street maintenance activities between 2 a.m. and 6 a.m. jccogtp/mem/actcomm-300Dubuque.doc City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: September 12, 2005 To: City Clerk and City Council From: John Yapp, Acting JCCOG Traffic Engineering Planner Re: Item for September 20, 2005 City Council meeting: Installing NO PARKING ALLEY TO HERE sign on the north side of Court Street, opposite Oakland Avenue As directed by Title 9, Chapter 1, Section 3B of the City Code, this is to advise the City Council of the following action. Action: Pursuant to Section 9-1-3A(10): Install a NO PARKING ALLEY TO HERE sign on the north side of Court Street, approximately eight (8) feet east of the driveway serving 1182 Court Street. Comment: This action is being taken as a result of a property owner comment and subsequent staff investigation of visibility concerns with vehicles parked on the north side of Court Street in the Court Street / Oakland Avenue intersection. The Court Street / Oakland Avenue intersection includes a school-route crosswalk, and an off-set alley. By establishing NO PARKING ALLEY TO HERE between the 1182 Court Street driveway and the alley opposite Oakland Avenue, the intersection will be kept clear of parked vehicles. Date: September 14, 2005 To: City Council From: Anissa Williams, JCCOG Traffic Engineering Planner ~ Re: Proposed traffic calming for the alley between Bradley Street and 7th Avenue parallel to Muscatine Avenue As stated in the August 25, 2005 letter circulated to City Council, we have been approached by residents, whose homes have frontage on the alley on between Bradley Street and 7th Avenue, to be considered for the City's Traffic Calming Program. Upon evaluation, the alley qualified for the Traffic Calming Program based on 85th percentile speeds in excess of 5 mph over the speed limit in an alley (10 mph) as designated by City Code. Due to the Iow number of residences affected, the step in the City's Traffic Calming Program that requires meeting with residents was skipped and we proceeded directly to a survey of the neighborhood. Speed humps were the preferred traffic calming option by the neighborhood, and the only realistic traffic calming option. A neighborhood survey was conducted and sent to 10 households with property adjacent to the proposed alley for traffic calming. Seven households returned the survey, with one not having a name or address listed. The neighborhood response was 6 in favor and 1 opposed. That is an 86% majority, clearly above the traffic calming project requirement of at least a 60% majority. We will proceed with the public comment period and include a resolution for construction of the speed humps on the October 4, 2005 City Council formal meeting unless directed otherwise. cc: Jeff Davidson Ron Knoche Rick Fosse John Sobaski rngr/Agenda Items/t raft calm.doc CIl¥ OF IOW^ CIIY 4 I 0 last Washington Street Iowa C~ty, Io~a 52240-1826 {319) 356-5000 August 25, 2005 (~ 19) 356-5009 FAX www.icgov.org Residents of property adjoining the alley between Seventh Avenue and Bradley Street Re: Potential Traffic Calming in the alley between Seventh Avenue and Bradley Street Dear Resident: Recently, the City received a petition from residents whose property adjoins the alley between Bradley Street and Seventh Avenue, parallel to Muscatine Avenue, requesting to be considered for the City's Traffic Calming Program. The City completed an evaluation and deemed the street qualifies for the program based on the 85th percentile speed of the traffic in the alley exceeding the speed limit of 10 mph by at least 5 mph. Due to geometric restrictions, it was determined that speed humps would be the preferred traffic calming device. Speed humps are not the same as speed bumps. Speed bumps are used to slow traffic in parking lots and must be driven over very slowly. Speed humps are 12 feet in length with a maximum height of four inches in the center as shown in the attached drawing. A speed hump is meant to be driven over comfortably at the posted speed limit. We are proposing to eliminate the step in the City's Traffic Calming Program that requires a public meeting of affected residences. At this meeting we would normally discuss the various traffic calming options available, but for your alley we believe speed humps are the only realistic option. So we will proceed to the next step in the City's Traffic Calming Program, which is a survey of the affected neighborhood. For this project the "neighborhood" is defined by the City Council as all residential dwelling units on property which is contiguous to this alley. This results in a survey of 9 affected properties. The enclosed postage paid survey card has been provided to you so that you can indicate to us whether or not you are in favor of the proposed speed humps in the alley between Bradley Street and Seventh Avenue, parallel to Muscatine Avenue. The City's Traffic Calming Program is not intended to have the City impose unwanted traffic calming devices on a neighborhood. It is intended to allow a neighborhood to determine if they wish to have traffic calming devices installed. The neighborhood survey must indicate that at least 60% of neighborhood residents responding are in favor of the proposed traffic calming installation. Otherwise, the proposal will not be forwarded to the City Council for consideration. To clarify, each residence receives one vote, not each resident. If the proposal receives at least 60% approval from your neighborhood, it will be forwarded to the City Council for consideration. The City Council will make the final decision. Comments we receive on the proposal from Iowa City Transit, the Fire Department, Police Department, Ambulance Service and Department of Public Works will also be provided to the City Council. If approved by the City Council, we will install the speed humps in locations shown on the enclosed diagram this fall. Signs would also be installed warning motorists of the speed humps ahead. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Please return your survey postcard no later than September 9, 2005. If you have any questions, I can be contacted at 356-5254 or anissa- williams@iowa-city, org. Sincerely, Anissa Williams JCCOG Traffic Engineering Planner Attachments cc: City Council City Manager Marcia Klingaman, Neighborhood Services Coordinator jccogt p/Itrs/7th-B radley.doc 716 725 ~ PREIPr]sE]3 SPEED HUMP LFICAT ~[FINS between Bradley Street ~nd 7th Avenue August PO05 Marian Karr From: james-po bst@uiowa, ed u Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 6:25 PM To: cou ncil@iowa-city.org Subject: Crosswalk on Benton Street I have spoken to John Yapp the Assistant Transportation Planner about this matter, so I actually don't need to speak at the September 20th meeting about it. Sorry about not knowing exactly who to complain to. Sincerely, James H Pobst "The static picture of uniform speed is painted by a class of speed freaks" T. Gitlin, Media Unlimited Marian Karr ..... Original Message ..... From: John Yapp Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 10:59 AM To: 'james-pobst@uiowa.edu' Cc: Kathryn Johansen ; City Council Subject: FW: Crosswalk on Benton Street Hello Mr. Pobst: Your e-mail was forwarded to me for a response. We have to be very selective about where we install uncontrolled, marked crosswalks. Local and national research has shown that installing mid-block crosswalks in higher-volume, higher-speed corridors can decrease safety for the pedestrian if the pedestrian expects a driver to yield to them, and the driver is not expecting the pedestrian to walk into the street. Unfortunately, the pedestrian will always lose in this instance, so we have to be realistic about where to mark uncontrolled crosswalks. The in-pavement lights at Benton Street and Greenwood Driver were funded by the Iowa Department of Transportation as a research project in whether a higher-visibility crosswalk would increase safety for pedestrians. As you note, and as we have verified an~ reported, many drivers still do not yield when the lights are flashing. Many if not most pedestrians also do not wait to use this crosswalk; they wait for a gap in traffic, and then cross the street at scattered locations throughout the block. This high-visibility crosswalk did not help channelize pedestrians to cross at a consistent location. That said, an instance where we would mark a mid-block, uncontrolled crosswalk is where there is a concentration of pedestrians crossing at a consistent location. Where there is a consistent crossing location, the crosswalk serves as a notice to the driving public of the pedestri.an crossing location. An example of this is on Iowa Avenue in front of the English-Philosophy building, or at school crossings where the crossing guard ensures the kids cross at a consistent location. I will have some observations taken on Benton Street in the next few weeks, and will contact the Transit Department to get their perspective, and will let you know what our recommendation is. Sincerely, John Yapp, Assistant Transportation Planner ..... Original Message ..... From: james-pobst@uiowa.edu [mailto:james-pobst@uiowa.edu] Sent: Friday, September 09, 2005 3:23 PM To: council@iowa-city.org Subject: Crosswalk on Benton Street Hello, my name is James H Pobst. I am a graduate student attending the University. I live at 912 Benton Dr. in Benton Manor apartments. I would like to speak during the public comment section of your September 20th meeting on the following matter: I have come to the opinion that there needs to be a second crosswalk on Benton St. in addition to the one near the corner of Greenwood and Benton. A lot of students like myself and other people live in apartments on the south side of ! Benton, and if they get off at the Oakcrest bus stop in front of Seville Apts. they need to cross the street since of course the bus has exits on the right- hand side. I have lived in this area and used the city buses for over a year, and have noticed how drivers ROUTINELY do not wait behind the bus when it is stopped. They seem to think that they can go ahead and pass on the left, leaving pedestrians like myself in a dangerous situation of wondering when the road will be clear. Benton St. as you may know is often busily used as a traffic artery in the western part of the city, and the scenario I~m describing occurs quite frequently during weekday afternoons, at the same time that the bus is dropping off a lot of riders like myself. There are also parents and children among the bus passenger who get off at this particular stop. My question to you is: Why do pedestrians like myself need to respect the heedlessness of car drivers? If there was a second crosswalk painted next to the Seville Apts. stop, it would send the message that drivers need to slow down and be alert to people needing to cross the street, which they should do anyway. I can also tell you from experience that many drivers don't even respect the first crosswalk near Greenwood and Benton even with its flashing lights, they just pick up speed as they're going up the hill and then cruise right through, sometimes well over the sp~ed limit. I don't think this would be a big expense for the city, it's just a matter of adding a sign and some painted white lines. It may seem like a trivial matter for the council to address, but I think it's ultimately a matter of the city addressing the safety of bus passengers and pedestrians. Please write me back at this address to confirm that this is a topic I can speak about during the September 20th meeting. I look forward to hearing from you regarding this matter. Sincerely, James H Pobst "The static picture of uniform speed is painted by a class of speed freaks" T. Gitlin, Media Unlimited Marian Karr From: Dale Helling Sent: Friday, September 09, 2005 3:56 PM To: 'james-pobst@uiowa. ed u' Cc: *City Council; Jeff Davidson Subject: RE: Crosswalk on Benton Street Dear Mr. Pobst, Thank you for your recent email to the City Council regarding traffic on West Benton Street. Council members do not receive their emails directly. Your message will be forwarded to them as part of their September 20 meeting consent agenda. You are certainly welcome to address this issue at the Council meeting during the time for public comment. I am also forwarding your message to the Transportation Planning Division for follow up. Thank you for your interest and concern. Sincerely, Dale Helling Assistant City Manager ..... Original Message ..... From: james-pobst@uiowa.edu [mailto:james-pobst@uiowa.edu] Sent: Friday, September 09, 2005 3:23 PM To: council@iowa-city.org Subject: Crosswalk on Benton Street Hello, my name is James H Pobst. I am a graduate student attending the University. I live at 912 Benton Dr. in Benton Manor apartments. I would like to speak during the public comment section of your September 20th meeting on the following matter: I have come to the opinion that there needs to be a second crosswalk on Benton St. addition to the one near the corner of Greenwood and Benton. A lot of students like myself and other people live in apartments on the south side of Benton, and if they get off at the Oakcrest bus stop in front of Seville Apts. they need to cross the street since of course the bus has exits on the right- hand side. I have lived in this area and used the city buses for over a year, and have noticed how drivers ROUTINELY do not wait behind the bus when it is stopped. They seem to think that they can go ahead and pass on the left, leaving pedestrians like myself in a dangerous situation of wondering when the road will be clear. Benton St. as you may know is often busily used as a traffic artery in the western part of the city, and the scenario I'm describing occurs quite frequently during weekday afternoons, at the same time that the bus is dropping off a lot of riders like myself. There are also parents and children among the bus passenger who get off at this particular stop. My question to you is: Why do pedestrians like myself need to respect the heedlessness of car drivers? If there was a second crosswalk painted next to the Seville Apts. stop, it would send the message that drivers need to slow down and be alert to people needing to cross the street, which they should do anyway. I can also tell you from experience that many drivers don't even respect the first crosswalk near Greenwood and Benton even with its flashing lights, they just pick up speed as they're going up the hill and then cruise right through, sometimes well over the speed limit. I don't think this would be a big expense for the city, it's just a matter of adding a sign and some painted white lines. It may seem like a trivial matter for the council to address, but I think it's ultimately a matter of the city addressing the safety of bus passengers and pedestrians. Please write me back at this address to confirm that this is a topic I can speak about 1 during the September 20th meeting. I look forward to hearing from you regarding this matter. Sincerely, James H Pobst "The static picture of uniform speed is painted by a class of speed freaks" T. Gitlin, Media Unlimited Marian Karr From: Paul Clark Behrend [pcbehrend@hotmail.com] Sent: Friday, September 09, 2005 3:57 PM To: nlcl@north-liberty.lib.ia.us; bjames@ci.north-liberty.ia.us; mmitchell@ci.north-liberty.ia.us; droberts@ci.north-liberty.ia.us; tpalmer@ci.north-liberty.ia.us; dhilton@ci.north-liberty.ia.us; dcrowner@north-liberty.lib.ia.us; jgarner@north-liberty.lib.ia.us; ggoldsmith@ci.north-liberty.ia.us; ssimpson @ci. north-liberty, ia. us; sprochaska@ci, north-Ii berty, ia. us; n beuter@ci.coralville, ia. us; cfriis@ci.coralville.ia.us; jfausett@ci.coralville.ia.us; tgill@ci.coralville, ia.us; jlundell@ci.coralville.ia.us; jschnake@ci.coralville.ia.us; jweihe@ci.coralville.ia.us; hherwig@ci.coralville.ia.us; council@iowa-city.org; steve-atkins@iowa-city.org Subject: innovative lighting-hybrid solar luminaire for gov't and city buildings How wonderful it would be to incorportate this innovative technology--a hybrid solar lighting technology called a luminaire, developed by Oak Ridge National Laboratory--on (and in) gov't buildings, e.g. post offices, courthouses, community centers, libraries, recreation centers, city halls, schools, etc. God bless, Paul Clark Behrend North Liberty, IA resident "Story last updated at 1:04 p.m. on September 1, 2005 Hybrid solar lighting dedicated at AMSE By: Tatia M. Harris I Oak Ridger Staff tatia.harris~oakridger.com In a dedication cerexnony Tuesday morning at the American Museum of Science and Energy, a new technology featuring hybrid solar lighting was launched. Through an innovative entrepreneurial leave program in which researchers at Oak Ridge National Laboratory are allowed to start companies and given assistance, Sunlight Direct, located in Oak Ridge, formed in order to commercialize hybrid solar lighting. The company developed the technology at ORNL and was funded through programs from Department of Energy and the Tennessee Valley Authority in partnership with utility companies, state energy agencies, industry and universities. "This technology was developed by ORNL scientists and through part of a long-standing partnership between DOE and TVA, with over 60 years of collaboration as the nation's largest power producer and ventures in technology and economic development. The hybrid solar lighting system combines sunlight with electric light, offsetting the use of electricity (and) thereby saving energy," said Jim Reafsnyder, director of the Office of Partnerships and Program Development at DOE. "This is very exciting technology and I'm happy to see it coming to this stage of development. The advantage in this technology is that it conserves energy and provides natural light inside. Light quality affects students 9/9/2005 Page 2 of 2 learning in school, the productivity of workers, and can encourage customers to buy more in stores," said Glenn Strahs, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Solar Technologies Program, at DOE. Marilyn Brown, deputy director of ORNL Engineering Science and Technology Division, said, "The success of this program is due to the talent and tenacity of many people. Programs like this are making science and technology 'sexy'." Sunlight Direct's product, the HSL 3000, uses a roof-mounted 48- inch diameter collector and small fiber optics to transfer sunlight to top floor hybrid fixtures that contain electric lamps. The two light sources work under a control system in tandem by dimming electric lights when the sunlight is bright and turning them up as clouds move in or the sun sets. The technology can also be used to reduce energy for cooling because of the system's ability to block ultraviolet and infrared heat. Casey Porto, ORNL director of Technology Commercialization Technology Transfer and Economic Development, spoke of UT- Battelle's management and commitment to transferring research 'i; Glenn Strahs of the Department of Energy's Solar results into the marketplace. Energy Technologies, Oak Ridge National Laboratory's Solar Technologies program manager Melissa Voss Lapsa, Sunlight Direct president John"A lot of research doesn't get a chance to impact people in a Norris, and TVA Emerging Technologies project manager David R. Dinse stand beside the Hybrid positive way. We want to encourage researchers to be the best solar Lighting System during this week's researchers but also feel free to start companies and not just be presentation at the American Museum of Science held inside the walls of research. I'm proud of the work we do and Energy in Oak Ridge. through the entrepreneurial leave program, our aggressive licensing program, and the work with a wide variety of companies working with Tech 2020," said Porto. Bill Baxter, chairman at TVA, said he has had an interest in solar energy for a long time and feels that solar technology will soon be considered mainstream and not alternative technology. "If we can learn not to use generated electricity, this may be the biggest source of energy for generations to come. Solar energy meets the three E's TVA looks for: it creates energy, provides environmental stewardship and provides the opportunity for economic development. The future of solar technology is on the entrepreneur's shoulder to make it a viable commodity in the workplace," Baxter said. The hybrid solar lighting system is featured at The American Museum of Science and Energy. For more information, call (865) 576-3218 or visit the Web site at ~,~m~,org." The above article can be found at: <http://www.oakridge_r.com/stories/090105/new_20050901016.shtml> Sunlight Direct plans a project launch in 2007. See following link: <http://www. livescience.com/technology/050324_solar lightin~g.html> Hopefully increased interest in this technology can enable a sooner project launch, or at least a higher proliferation at the scheduled project launch. Further, it would be truly magnificent to see these incorporated into the rebuilding of the Gulf Coast region in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. Fewer leaky skylights! Please forward the above information. Thank you. 9/9/2005 CiTY CLERK ity Council Members iOWA Oil-Y, IOWA 410 E. Washington Street Iowa Ci,, S:240 Iowa City Council Members: Chuck Bogh Sales Associate I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · 'Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before Affiliates 245'1 Coral Ct., Suito Signature ~q.~ Coral¥ille, I~ $2241  /t~/x/ ~(~rJ Office: {$10} $45-$$00 ~~ Fax: (319)545-6593 Cell: (319) 430-8217 ........... cbogh@mchsi.com Each office independently owned and operated Cedar Rapids I0wa City FILED Realty Iowa Ci~ Council Memb~ lO'fA CFD( IOWA 410 E. W~hM~on S~et Iowa CiW, IA 52240 Iowa CiW Council Mem~: I am ~iting to you ~ a mem~r of~e Iowa Ci~ A~a A~iation of REALTORS&. I am c~ a~ui a numar of provisions in the pro~ development c~e ~at the CiW is conside~g adoring Y~ Ci~ of Iowa Ci~ ~M ~ ~ d~i~ ~~ on ~identiai cons~ction. ~ ~ of~ ~M ~ ~ ~~'s ~isi~, ~t m~ted by ~e Ci~. · ~ ~ ~ ~ a"~ ~, ~ ~ ~ ~ a si~W~t ~m w~n of~ex Ci~ ~~ ~ ~ t~ ~~ ~ ~ of ~leys. It is ~air to ~ ~i~ of ~ ~ ~~om ~ ~ ~ to ~ ~ ~tm alleys a~ ~ ~ ~e ~o~d ~e, ~el ~ ~sifive A~ ~ould ~ ~quire u~ o[a Pl~n~ ~el~ment ~erhy. if the fe~ Adoring the proud development ~e without making significant changes regarding lhese m~e~ w~ld ~ a ~r d~ision for the futu~ of Iowa City, I encourage you to consider these ~qctors ~ ~i~uss d~ese issues fi~her wilh lhe Land Development Council, Iowa Ci~ ~ea Ass~ciati~n~f~t~EA~;~.~RS~andGr~ater~a~ity~eaH~meBt.~dersAss~ci~i~f~e~.~~.~ voting on the pcoso~ 206 Main Street P.O. Box 38 2721 120th St. NE Suite C Solon, Iowa 52333 ~vw. corridorconnection.com Swisher, I0wa 52338 319-624~9123 fax: 319-624-9120 319-857-9123 fax: 319-857-9126 FILED Ed Humpleby SE? i h ttlq I! Premier Pm aies 1006 5~ Street G[~ ¢~E~K September 13, 2005 Coralville, ~ 52241 ~OWA CI~ IOWA Iowa CiW Co~cfl M~bgs 410 E. W~gton S~eet Iowa CiW, IA 52240 Iowa CiW Co~cil Mem~rs: I ~ ~g m you ~ a memb~ of~e Iowa CiW ~ Assodafion of ~TORS~. I m concerned about a nmb~ ofprohsions ~ ~e proposed development code ~at ~e CiW is ~nsid~g adop~g ~d I have omlin~ my p~ ~ncems below. ~e CiW of Iowa CiW should not ~pose desi~ st~d~ds on residenfifl cons~on. ~e design of homes shoed be ~e ~nsmer's derision, not m~dated by ~e CiW. ~e CiW shoed not ~cre~e lot ~d~s ~ resid~fifl zones, ~ proposed by ~e new ~de. hcre~g lot wides ~crea~s ~as~c~e costs for ~e developers, whch ~e~es ~e cost to consm~s. ~e proposed ~e contras a "d~siW bonus", but it is not a si~fic~t bonus when mmp~ to ~e c~em code. h ad&fio~ ~e densiW bonus ~e~e5 the cost of housing by requ~ng the developer m comply M~ desi~ s~ds. ~e d~siW ne~s to be ~e~ed to cov~ ~e costs of~e r~remmts ~d keep hous~g ~ord~le. ~e propo~ ~e ~ficflly reduces ~e ~e~ ~ which z~o-lot l~e homes c~ be builL whch l~ts o~ mm~W's ~iliw m prohde one of~e most ~or~le ~es of dwellings. ~e CiW should p~t z~o-lot l~e homes RS-8 zones ~d shoed not ~pose desi~ st~ds on ~ose homes. If~e CiW is gong to r~e develop~s to ~ns~ct fll~s ~ c~n developments, ~e CiW should ~sme Se long-tern mmten~ce ~d rep~r of~ose flleys. It is ~f~ to b~den residenm of~e~ new subdihsions ~ ~e cost m r~ ~d ~~g ~eys ~m ~e req~ed to be cons~cted by ~e CiW. Nei~borhood me~gs should be opfionfl, not m~dato~. A nmber of developers ~eMy use neighborhood m~gs ~d ~e able to respond dkectly to nei~bor's conce~ ~out ~e necessiW of~e m~to~ meet~gs ~d repo~g ob~gafions ~posed by ~e proposed ~de. * Level II Sensitive ~e~ shoed not r~re use of a Pl~ed Developmmt Ov~lay. ~e CiW shodd automatic~y re~d ~ Space fees m ~e residents of a sub&hsion if the fees ~e not used ~thn a re~onable p~od of~e. Adop~g ~e proposed development rode ~out m~g sig~fic~t ch~ges reg~d~g ~ese ma~ers would be a p~r a decision for ~e ~e of Iowa CiW. I enco~age you to consid~ ~ese factors ~d discuss ~ese issues ~er M~ the L~d Development Co~cil, Iowa CiW ~ea Asmciation of~TORS~ ~d Oeater Iowa CiW ~ea Home B~ders Association before vo~g on ~e proposed code. Respect~ly Sub~ Ed Hmpleby, Refltor FILED 005 SEP I !+ All Ii: 52 CITY' CLEa Iowa City Council Members IOWA CITY,tOWA 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code comains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. LEPIC-KROEGER, REALTORS® 2346 Mormon Trek Blvd.--Io va City, IA 52246. (319) 1CI .,'T'{ Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when ' ' · compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of hoUsing by requiring the developer tO comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types , ':.' 'ofdwellings: The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in · RS-8 zones and should·not impose design: standards on th.ose homes. ' . · If the' City is going to require developers to constructalleys in certain, developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to~ burden residents of these newsubdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be,optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting' the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues ~further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City, Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa -City 'Area: Home.' Builders Association before voting on the proposed code~ - · ~ .: ',' .... Signature FILED William Rose tOl}5 SEP 114 &l~ l t: 5 ~ PREMIER PROPERTIES RE/MAX Premier Properties 1006 5th Street ~[TY 0L.~RK September 13, 2005 C0ralville, IA 52241 iOWA (}[!B{ IOWA Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and I have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiting the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long-term maintenance and repair of those alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintaining alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor a decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the ~posed code. Iowa City Area Association of REA LTORS® Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of ho~nes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code.  438 Highway I West 319-338-646o phone e-Mail: ico~ar@icaar.org Iowa city, IA 52246 3~9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org FIEALTOFI~ Page 1 of 1 Marian Karr From: Cheryl Nelson [cheryl@icaar. org] Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2005 2:57 PM To: council@iowa-city.org Subject: Request for input The Land Development Council, an entity of the Home Builders Association and the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®, repectfully requests the opportunity to work with the Council during the work sessions and public sessions regarding the new zoning code draft. We have provided numerous letters from parties of both organizations expressing some of our concerns. We are all consumer advocates in our business activities and want to work in the best interest of those who would like to live and work in our community. We hope that you will consider our request to be involved as you start the process of reviewing the documents. Cheryl Nelson Association Executive Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® 438 Hwy 1 West Iowa City, IA 52246 319-338-6460 9/15/2005 ©-< m - Iowa City Council Members ~ C') cr~ {'-'- 410 E. Washington Street --< ~r~ a~, VT] Iowa City, IA 52240 ~ ~ ---e [~ Iowa City Council Members: m I am writing to you as a member of the lowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. 1 am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings Should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Iowa City Area Association of REA LTORS® N Iowa City Council Members .~:~O co 410 E. Washington Street ~'"C.D~ ~'m -1-] .... Iowa City, IA 52240 -~C~ o~ I--- Iowa City Council Members: "'<~ t~-~rln' ~ ~ I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. ~:~ ~ I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is o~ considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · lfthe City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level Il Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signa/ture - [ 438 Highway 1 West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar, or9 Iowa City, IA 5e,e46 $~9-$$8-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR® Multiple Listing Dick Davin Real Estate FtLED 914 S. Dubuque Street Fax (319) 351-1337 Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Z005 SEP I 5 t~ I!: hfi Bus (319) 338-7549 CIT"f CLEBK Iowa City Council Members IOWA CITY, IOWA 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of thc requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature [ ~/ 0ko-~-~ '~t~'[q Iowa City Area Association orr EA L TORS Iowa City Council Members .~ ? eon l-"- 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · lfthe City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision iftbe fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code.  438 Highway 1 West 319-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org IOwa City, IA 52246 3~9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org IlEAl_TOIl* FILED September 14, 2005 iOWA CiTY IOWA Iowa Ci~ Council Mem~ 410 E. Washin~on SWeet Iowa Ci~ ~ 52240 Iowa CiW Council Members: I'm ~iting to you as a member of~e Iowa CiW ~ea Association of ~TORS~. But as a mem~r of~e national Con, ss on New Urb~ism as well, I'm ce~ain to be in ~e minofiW of~e ReCtors ~oup, in ~at I feel there should be SOME good stand,ds in design in a communiW like Iowa CiW if we a~ to prese~e and enco~age (perhaps return to) a more pleas~t enviro~ent where people who w~t to imeract with one ano~er in nei~borho~s c~ do so easily because of~e ve~ na~e of~e pl~ envi~enL ~d where storage of automobiles is not ~e prim~ element of ~e nei~borhood l~dscape. I ~ a staunch believer in ~e Peninsula Neighborhood project, for example, and there again I may be in the minoriW ~ong Iowa CiW Realtor. There is natural resist~ce by developers, Realtors, ~d m~y owners, to accepting control (or even ~id~ce) of ANY kind, especially here in Iowa CiW, but the alternative to at least some ~n~l c~ ~ a bli~t ~d o~en causes ~t~e problems out of sho~-te~ ra~er th~ long-te~ ~inking. Still, with all of this stated, I have some concerns thru ~e process scale ~Y be tipped too far toward CiW planners, and thru in upcoming decisions when exceptions and "~dfathering in" decisions may be needed, ~e CiW s~ffmay not be as o~n ~ ~ey coul~should be as we ease into new ways of doing ~ings. Concerns: · Allowances will needed to assure affordable housing can still be built--there is wide concern in the Realtor communiW that builders will be limited to providing a much hi~er-priced product. I am in favor ofm~imizing g~age "pre,ncc" ~ communities/development, ~d even favor ~e "alley behind concept," but if the CiW is going to requi~ develo~rs to cons~ct alleys in ce~in developments, I believe ~e CiW should ass~e the long te~ mainten~ce and repair of such alleys. It seems unfair to b~den residents of these new subdivisions with the cost of repairing ~d maintaining alleys that ~e required to be cons~c~d by the Ci~. Al~ou~ I do not personally espouse eve~ concern of~e L~d Development Co,oil, Iowa CiW ~ea Association of ~ALTORS~ ~d Greater Iowa CiW Area Home Builders Association, ~d have chosen to write my own le~er to you, I believe these ~oups have spent eno~ous effo~ and ~e doing their ve~ best to convey to you what the majori~ of the ~oups believe ~d hope for. I personally a~ee with them that there needs to be more give ~d ~e by ~e CiW as ~e new process is issued in, ~d probably ~onsidemtion of some of~e ~qui~mems pl~ned to go into effect. I suppose there is a na~l (~d sometimes good-na~) ~tagonism be~een the Developer~ealtor communiW and the CiW Planning staff. I wish each could see the good points of the other, ~d perhaps this will happen over the long te~--~d none of us should be thinking just for ~e sho~ te~. lan Sw~mn BLANK & McC~E, The Real Estate Company FILED 005 SEP 1 5 I1:h5 Iowa City Council Mombers Ct' ¥ CLERK 410 E. Washington Stro t 10WA IOWA Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastm~re costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. Thc density needs to be increased to cover the costs of thc requirements and keep housing affordable. · Thc proposed code drastically reduces thc areas in which zero-lot linc homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetirtgs and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to thc residents of a subdivision if the fees arc not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature ff Realt ~ 2nd Street, Ste. 200 Coralville, IA 52241 ~-~ ~/~ Fl1 (319) 354-0581 Office · (319) 354-6432 Fax www.iowarealty.com Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 10~` 0/'¥"(, IOWA Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my pdmary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed cod,.". · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Oveday. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. I feel strongly about this. Please give thoughtful consideration to this letter. Sincerely, ~on ~roud, Realtor Iowa Realty Co., Inc. FIL. ED LEPIC-KROEGER, REALTORS® CITY CLERK 2346 Mormon Trek Blvd. · Iowa City, IA 52246- (319) 3~ 1CIT~' iOWA Iowa city Council Members 410 E. Washington SWeet Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design &homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature Iowa City Area Association of REA LTORS Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washin~on S~eet .~ ~ ~ ~ .... Iowa Ci~, IA 52240 Iowa Ci~ Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa Ci~ Area Association of REALTORS~. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the Ci~ is considering adopting and have outlined my prima~ concerns below. The Ci~ of Iowa Ci~ should not impose design standards on residential cons~uction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the Ci~. The Ci~ should not increase lot wides in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths incm~es in~as~ucmre costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. The proposed code contains a "densi~ bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the cu~ent code. In addition, the densi~ bonus increases ~e cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with desi~ stand,ds. The densi~ needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our communiW's abiliW to provide one of~e most affordable ~es of dwellings. ~e Ci~ should pe~it zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. If the Ci~ is going to require developers to cons~uct alleys in ce~in developments, the CiW should assume the long tern mainminance and repair of alleys. It is unfair burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that a~ required to be cons~ucted by the Ci~. Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandato~. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessi~ of the mandato~ meetings and reposing obligations imposed by the proposed code. * Level II Sensitive Are~ should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. The Ci~ should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making si~ificant ch~ges regarding these ma~ers would be a poor decision for the futura of Iowa Ci~. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues fu~her wi~ the Land Development Council, Iowa Ci~ Area Association of ~ALTORS~ and Greater Iowa Ci~ Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. 438 Highway ~ West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar~icaar, or9 Iowa Ci~, ~ 5~246 3~9-338-6957 f~ web site: icaar.org Iowa City Area Association of REA LTORS Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: Po I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the.long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature~/~/~~we'st' ~__1  43 ighway 1 v3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR® Iowa City Area Association orr EAL TORS ® Iowa City Council Members ~ ~ w"~ "'Fi 410 E. Washington Street ~--q CD, cr~ [-'" Iowa City, IA 52240 '-< ~ "o [-['] Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level Il Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature B 438 Highway ] 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org West Iowa City, IA 52246 3]9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTORa Iowa City Area Association orr F,A LTORS ® Iowa Ci~ Council Members 410 E. Washin~on S~eet Iowa Ci~, IA 52240 Iowa CiW Council Members: I am ~iting to you as a member of the Iowa Ci~ Area Association of REALTORS~. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the Ci~ is considering adopting and have outlined my prima~ concerns below. The Ci~ oflowa Ci~ should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the Ci~. The Ci~ should not increme lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Incre~ing lot widths increases in~as~cmre costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. The proposed code contains a "densi~ bonus", but it is not a si~ificant bonus when comp~ed to the cu~ent code. In addition, ~e densiW bonus increases the cost of housing by requiting the developer to comply with desi~ st~d~ds. The densiW needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be builL which limits our communiW's abiliW m provide one of~e most affordable ~es of dwellings. ~e Ci~ should pemit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. If the Ci~ is going to require developers to cons~uct alleys in ce~in developments, the Ci~ should assume the long tern maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required m be cons~ucted by the CiW. Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandato~. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessi~ of the mandato~ meetings and reposing obligations imposed by the proposed code. * Level II Sensitive Arem should not require use ora Pl~ned Development Overlay. The Ci~ should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without m~ing si~ificant ch~ges regarding ~ese maUers would be a p~r decision for the fumm of Iowa CiW. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these iss~ fu~her with the Land Development Council, Iowa Ci~ Area Association of REALTOR~ hnd Greater Iowa Ci~ Area Home Builders Association before voting on the propos~co~e. / Signature ~ ~ '~/ ~  438 Hiy~ay ~ West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar~icaar.or9 _l ~o~~ Iowa Ci~ ~ 5e~46 3~9-338-6957 f~ web site: icaar.or9 Iowa City Area Association orr F,A L TOILS ® Iowa City Council Members (D 410 E. Washington Street O ~ ~ Iowa City, IA 52240 -x~ -r't Iowa City Council Members: .-< r'- I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS _~ Tx: I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that ~h:;e City considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City oflowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature  438 Highway I West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR~" FILED 005 SEP 15 PN 2:08 CITY CLERK IOWA O-fY, IOWA August 30, 2005 Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you not only as a REALTOR® but as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® as well. I am greatly concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City of Iowa City is considering adopting and have outlined the primary concerns below: The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones as proposed by this new code. Increasing the width of residential lots will thus increase the overall cost for development. This overall increase will as a result be passed on to the consumer causing housing to be less affordable. The City of Iowa City should not be granted the power to impose design standards on residential construction. The design of a home should be left to the customers to determine. Developers and Builders will produce products that sell. Telling consumers what they like by enforcing a design standard would be a mistake in our marketplace. The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes may be built. This move would again limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of housing in our market today. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots of RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards. The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but this so called "bonus" is very minimal when compared to the current code. In addition this bonus will also increase the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density would then have to increase simply to cover the cost of these new requirements so that housing could remain affordable. If the City is going to require developer's to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term care, maintenance and repair of these alleys. It is unreasonable, not to mention unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required by the City. Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. > Level H Sensitive Areas should not require use of Planned Development Overlay. The City should automatically refund the Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making substantial changes regarding these concerns will be an extremely poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to deeply consider all of these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. ThankY,,~., - ~ / ense~.d to Se~ I~al Estate~n the State of Io~[a Premier Properties ~~/~ ~ ~ ~/~L~'~ ~ 1006 5' Street Coralville, Iowa 52241 ?]~[ 1 Office: (319)354-8644 Iowa City Area Association of REAL TORS Iowa CiW Council Membe~ 410 E. Washin~on S~cet owa Ci , S::40 IOWA IOWA Iowa CiW Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa CiW Area Association of REALTORS~. I am concerned about a number ogprovisions in the proposed development code thru the CiW is considering adopting and have outlined my prim~ concerns below. The Ciw of Iowa CiW should not impose design standards on residential cons~uction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the CiW. The CiW should not increase lot wides in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot wides increases in~as~cture costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. The proposed code contains a "densiW bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the cu~ent code. In addition, housing by requiting the dcwiop~r to comply with desi~ s~d~ds. ~e densi~ needs to be increased to cover the costs ofthe requirements and keep housin~ affordable. The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our communiW's abili~ to provide one of the most affordable ~s of dwellings. ~e Ci~ should pe~it zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose desi~ standards on those homes. Igthe CiW is ~oin~ to require developers to construct alleys in ce~in developments, the CiW should assume the lon~ te~ main~inance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions wi~ the cost to repair and maintain alleys thru are requi~d to be cons~cted by the CiW. Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandato~. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessiW of the mandato~ meetings and repo~in~ obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use cfa Planned Development Overlay. The CiW should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residems cfa subdivision igthe fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adoptin~ the proposed dcwlopmcnt code withom makin~ si~ificant chafes re~arding these ma~ers would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa Ci~. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues gusher with the Land Development Council, Iowa CiW Area Association of REALTORS~ and Greater Iowa CiW Area Home Builders Association before voting on the p~poscd code. .  438 Highway I 319-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar~icaar.org I West Iowa Ci~, ~ 5ee46 3~9-338-6957 f~ web site: icaar.org ~EALTO~® Iowa City Area Association of REA L TORS Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. 438 Highwa~j 1 West 319-$$8-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.or9 Iowa City, IA 52246 3~9-$$8-6957 fax web site: icaar.or9 REALTOR® Iowa City Area Association orr EA L TORS ® Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which Zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before votin~ the proposed code.  438 Highway ~ West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.or9 FIEALTOF? Iowa City Area Association of R F,A L TOILS ® Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street "~ Iowa City, IA 52240 C) -<~ Iowa City Council Members: Fr-1 I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS(i~ I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding l~hese matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signal/ / ' ~  438 Highway ~ West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar~icaar.org Iowa Ci~, ~ 5~46 3~9-338-6957 f~ web site: icaar.org REALTOR® Iowa City Area Association orr EA LTORS ® Iowa City Council Members ~ 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 --~ Iowa City Council Members: ~ l am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · lfthe City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. B 438 Highway ] West 3]9-338-6460 phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR~¢ Iowa City Area Association of REA LTORS® Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street ~--~C~ Iowa City, IA 52240 I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa CiW Area Association of REALTORS~. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the CiW is considering adopting and have outlined my prim~ concerns below. The CiW of Iowa CiW should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the CiW. The CiW should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Incre~ing lot wides increases in~as~c~re costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. The proposed code contains a "densiW bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the cu~ent code. In addition, ~e densiW bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with desi~ s~dards. The densiW needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our communiW's abiliW to provide one of the most affordable Wpes of dwellings. The CiW should pemit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. If the CiW is going to require developers to construct alleys in ce~in developments, the CiW should assume the long tern main~inance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions wi~ the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are ~quired to be cons~ucted by the CiW. Neighborhood meetings should ~ optional, not mandato~. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessiW of the mandato~ meetings and reposing obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. The CiW should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making si~ificant ch~ges ~garding these ma~ers would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa CiW. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues fu~her with the Land Development Council, Iowa CiW Area Association of REALTORS~ and Greater Iowa CiW Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature ~:t  438 Highwa~ ~ West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar~icaar.org Iowa Ci~, M 52~46 3~9-338-6957 f~ web site: icaar.or9 REALTO~<" Iowa City Area Association of REA LTORS® Iowa City Council Members rra 410 E. Washington Street C) ~ ---'° "T'i~ Iowa City, IA 52240 .~ ? ol , Iowa City Council Members: ~ ED I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®?> ~o I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City oflowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. ! encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. ~;~atu~-~ tS~/ ~___~_5~..,  438 Highway 1 West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 3~9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR<~ .... Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® Iowa City Council Members 22; 410 E. Washington Street ~ Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: ~ ~ I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®?:; I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature~ _ ~ B 438 Highway ] West 3]9-338-6460 phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa Citlj, IA 52246 3]9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR("  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 HBA Phone: {319) 351-5333 Fax: (319) 358-2443 E-mail: hbaofic@cs.com www.iowacityhomes.com HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION Advocates for homeownership by protnoting standards.for quali(y and q[fordablility September 8, 2005 Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I an~n concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature A, ffiliated with Natioual Association q]'Home Builders & Home Builders Association of Iowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 Fax: (319) 358-2443 E-mail: hbaofic@cs.com HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIAT;ON www. iowacityhomes.com Advocates' .['or homeowners'hip by promoting standards for · quality and affordablility ~ ~ eot') September 8, 2005 ran Iowa City Council Members ~ C) cra [-- 410 E. Washington Street ~ "o Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature '~' Afldiated with NutionaI Association of Home Builders & Home Builders Association qf lowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 HBA Fax: (319) 358-2443 E-mail: hbaofic@cs.com www. iowacityhomes.com HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION Advocates for hotneownership by promoting standards for quali(y attd qffordablility September 8, 2005 Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: ~, .-- I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature ~f r ) t_. ]l::5~t4 d, [ Affiliated with Natioaal Association of Home Builders & Home Builders A ssociatiou of Iowa  South Gilbert 1 1 P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 HBA Phone: (319) 351-5333 Fax: (319) 358-2443 E-mail: hbaofic@cs.com www.iowacityhomes.com HOME E]UILDERS ASSOCIATION Advocates.for homeownership by promoting standards for quality and a, ffordablility September 8, 2005 ,-.o CD Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Assoi~iition. concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is ca considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before v,o/ing otk[lre Pr~osed code. 4[filiated with National Assoeiation oJ'Home Builders & Home Builders Association of Iowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 HBA Phone: (319) 351-5333 Fax: (319) 358-2443 E-mail: hbaofic@cs.com HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION www. iowacityhomes.com Advocatex for homeownership by promoting standards for quality and affordablility September 8, 2005 Iowa City Council Members --~ 410 E. Washington Street C') '-' F'"' Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Associ~ilffon. I a~ concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed cgde. Signat~'ure ''~' / ,~d~ ~,~. A,[filiated with Natioual Association qf tlome Builders & ttome Builders' Association qf Iowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 HBA Phone: (319) 351-5333 Fax: (319) 358-2443 E-mail: HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION Advocatesfarhomeownership by promoting standards ,for quality and q[fordablility September 8, 2005 Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 3~' can Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature /- , A.lfiliated with National A ssociatioa of Home Builders' & Home Builders Associafioa qf Iowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 HBA Phone: (319) 351-5333 Fax: (319) 358-2443 E-mail: hbaofic@cs.com HOME BUI/DFF~$ A$$OCIA¥10N www. iowacityhomes.com Advocates'for homeownership by promoting standards'.for v-~ quality and affordablility C) ~ September 8, 2005 ~C~ ~ Iowa City Council Members CD ~ ~-~ ~ 410 E. Washington Street ~---~C) cn 7 Iowa City, IA 52240 r-r~ ~ Iowa City Council Members: B~; ~ I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposqd code. Signature 4ffiliated with National Association of Home Builders' & Home Builders' Association of Iowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 HBA Phone: ,319, 351-5333 Fax: (319) 358-2443 E-mail: hbaofic@cs.com H(3MF B[J~/(3F[I$ ]~SS(3(21ATI(3lXl www.iowacityhomes.com Advocates.for homeownership by promoting standards for quali(¥ and a.[[brdablility September 8, 2005 Iowa City Council Members ~;.rD 410 E. Washington Street -'o -TI Iowa City, IA 52240 ~ ''< -' Iowa City Council Members: ' ~ I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Associa~n. I al~ concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. -~he desi~gn of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature {~/1~,) Affiliated with National Association of Home Builders & Home Builders Associatiou of Iowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 HBA Phone: ,319} 351-5333 Fax: (319) 358-2443 E-mail: hbaofic@cs,com HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION www. iowacityhomes,com Advocates,['or homeownership by protnoting standards,for quality attd q[fordablility September 8, 2005 Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street ~ ~ -'~ Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain develo ~ments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before votin~o~_ Signature ti ~ A, ffiliated with National Association o.f Home Builders & Home Builders Association of lowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 HBA Phone: (319) 351-5333 Fax: (319) 358-2443 E-mail: hbaofic@cs.com www. iowacityhomes.com HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION Advocates for homeownership by promoting standards for quality and qfl'ordablility September 8, 2005 Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 ~ ::~ Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voti,~ on the propoled co{te. Signature L~P A.[filiated with National Association of tlo.te Builders & Hotne Builders Association of Iowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 HBA Phone: {319, 351-5333 Fax: (319) 358-2443 E-mail: hbaofic@cs.com www. iowacityhomes.com HOME BUILDERS ASSOQATION Advocates.for homeownership by protnoting standards for quality attd qfJbrdablility September 8, 2005 Iowa City Council Members cr~ ["-' 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature i~ Affiliated with National A ssociafion o['tlome BuiMers & Home Builders Association qf Iowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 Phone: (319) 351-5333 HBA E-mail: hbaofic@cs.com www.iowacityhomes.com HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION Advocates.for homeownership by protnoting standards,for quality and qffordablility September 8, 2005 Iowa City Council Members ~..C')~. 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Associa~r~. I am-- concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the Cityqs considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to.comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before k_~..filiated with National Associatio of Home Builders & Home Builders Association qJ'lowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 HBA Phone: (319) 351-5333 Fax: (319) 358-2443 E-mail: hbaofic@cs.com www. iowacityhomes.com HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION Advocatex.for homeownership by promoting standards for quality and q[fordablility September 8, 2005 _... Iowa City Council Members ~ '-~ 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 on Iowa City Council Members: ,~. I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders AssociatiOn. I an~ concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on, the proposed code. A~ffiliated with National Association of Home Builders & Home Builders Association of lowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 HBA Phone: (319, 351-5333 Fax: (319) 358-2443 E-mail: hbaofic@cs.com HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION www. iowacityhomes.com Advocates for homeownership by protnoting standards for quality and affordablility September 8, 2005 Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 ~'.~., ~:~ Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Great~Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before S~,nature ~ (~) AJ]Hiated with National Association of Home Builders & Home Builders Associatiou qf lowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 Phone: (319) 351-5333 E-mail: hbaofic@cs,com www, iow~tyhomes,com HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION Advocates.for homeownership by prontoting standards for quality attd qf[brdablility September 8, 2005 Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature ~)t9/I 4[.filiated with National Association of Home Builders & ttonte Builders Association of lowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 Phone: (319) 351-5333 E-mail: hbaofic@cs.com www,iowacityhomes,com HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION Advocates for homeownership C~ c. la by protnoting standards for quality and affordablility September 8, 2005 Iowa City Council Members :-< [~ "~ 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS~and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the propose~l code. Signature 4[.filiated with National Asso¢iation of Home Builders & ttome Builders Associatiou of lowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 Phone: (319) 351-5333 HBA Fax: (319) 358-2443 E-mail: hbaofic@cs.com www. iowacityhomes.com HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION Advocates for homeownership by promoting standards .for quality attd a[/brdablility September 8, 2005 Iowa City Council Members C3~C 410 E. Washington Street -5~ ..~ Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Assoc)ation of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before ~',. votinj~on the proposed.cq]de. Signature ,,,~0h ri Affiliated with Natioual A ssociation of Home Builders & ttome Builders Associatioa of Iowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 Phone: (319) 351-5333 HBA Fax: (319) 358-2443 E-mail: hbaofic@cs.com www. iowacityhomes.com HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION I Advocates for homeownership by protnoting standards for quality and q[fordablility ~ ~. September 8, 2005 Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 ~-, Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the prgpo,sed o~p~. ,,~ AJ. filiated with National Association of ttome Builders &tlome Builders Association of Iowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 Phone: (319) 351-5333 HBA Fax: (319} 358-2443 E-mail: hbaofic@cs,com www.io~cityhomes.com HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION Advocates.for homeownership by promoting standards .for quality and a,[[brdablility September 8, 2005 Iowa City Council Members ~'~ 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before vote,erin t~r, oposed code. AJ. filiated with National Association of Home Builders & Ho~ne Builders' Associatiou of lowa A 11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 The Greater ~owa City Area Phone: (313) 351-5333 E-mail: hbaofic@cs.com www.iowacityhomes.com HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION r Adw~cates for homeownership by promoting staudards for quality and a. ffordablility ~C~"~'~ ~r~ September 8, 2005 ~ -.~ Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street .:< ~ ,.~ Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before votin~ fflon the propoted code. /7 S~gnature AJfiliated with National Association qf Home Builders & Home Builders Association oJ'lowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 Phone: (319) 351-5333 HBA Fax: (319) 358-2443 E-mail:hbaofic@cs.com www.iowacityhomes.com HOME BUILDEF~S ASSOCIATION Advocates for homeownership by promoting standards for quality and qffordablility September 8, 2005 Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 2::.~, ..~ Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code.. /7 Signature AJJdiated with Natioual Association of Home Builders & ttome Builders' Association of lowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 HBA Phone: (319) 351-5333 Fax: (319) 356-2443 E-mail: hbaofic@cs.com www. iowacityhomes.com HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION ~ [ Advocates,for homeownership by protnoting standards for quality and q£fordablility ~' L-~ ~ September 8, 2005 ~rD~C) '~ "-crt Iowa City Council Members ~ ~ :~: 410 E. Washington Street ~ ~ Iowa City, IA 52240 B:' Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Affiliated with Natioaal A ssociatioa af tIome Builders & Home Builders Association o. fl Iowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 Phone: (319) 351-5333 HBA ,ax: E-mail: hbaofic@cs.com www.iowacityhomes.com HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION Advocates for homeownership by promoting standards for quali(v and affordablility September 8, 2005 Iowa City Council Members ~ ~ 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: ~ I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the ~roposed code. AJ~iliated with National Association oJ'Home Builders & ttome Builders Association q/'lowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 Phone: (319) 351-5333 HBA Fax: (319) 358-2443 E-mail: hbaofic@cs.com www.iowacityhomes.com HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION Advocates for homeownership by promoting standards for quality and qffordablility September 8, 2005 Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: 7:' --~ I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the p~opose4t code. A,[filiated with National Association oJ'tlome Builders & Home Builders Association qf lowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 Phone: (319) 351-5333 HBA E-mail: hbaofic@cs.com www.iowacityhomes.com HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION Advocates for homeownership by promoting standards.for quality attd a,[fordablility September 8, 2005 Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 O~7< .~. Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose'design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voJSn'~"6~he proposed c..oelje. 'Signature Z/~ ~ } ~ ] ~- ~ ~ ~ ~,,-,~ Affiliated with National Association of Home Builders & Home Builders Association of lowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 HBA Phone: (319) 351-5333 Fax: (319) 358-2443 E-mail: hbaofic@cs.com www. iowacityhomes.com HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION Advocates for homeownership by protnoting standards for qaality attd qffordablility September 8, 2005 Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: ~ ..~ I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed ~flde. Affiliated with National Association aJ'tlome Builders & Home Builders Association of Iowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 Phone: (319) 351-5333 HBA Fax: (319) 358-2443 E-mail: hbaofic@cs,com www.iowacityhomes.com HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION Advocates,for homeownership by prontoting standards for quality and q[blrdablility September 8, 2005 Iowa City Council Members © -- ~-' 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 -~ ~ "~ Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on.,the~ropose¢ code. A, ffiliated with Natitfital A ssoci~ion qf Home Builders & Home Builders Association qf lowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 Phone: (319) 351-5333 HBA Fax: (319) 356-2443 E-mail: hbaofic@cs.com www. iowacityhomes.com HOME E~UILDERS ASSOCIATION Advocates for homeownership by protnoting standards for Q c~r~ quality attd qffordablility '~ September 8, 2005 Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: >' ._s I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those hmnes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and ~reaj~e/Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before Signature ,~, ~/ //,, ,.- . A/.liliate~wiih ~ti'~nal Association of t tome Builders &tlome Builder,; Association of lowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 Phone: (319) 351-5333 HBA E-mail: hbaofic@cs.com www.iowacityhomes.com HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION Advocates.]'or homeownership by prontotiug standards for quality attd ql.'fardablility ~. September 8, 2005 3>' -~ .-.- -'"" Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before ,J~fiI3g on the prop~osed code. ,,~ A. ffiliated with National Association of Home Builde , & Home Builders Association of Iowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 Phone: (319) 351-5333 E-mail: hbaofic@cs.com www. iowacityhomes.com HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION Advocates for homeownership by promoting standards' for quality and qffordablility September 8, 2005 Iowa City Council Members --< ..,. ---'- 410 E. Washington Street ---~ C') Iowa City, IA 52240 -.--< Iowa City Council Members: ~'~ -~- I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am-''a concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Si~attire AJ. liliated with National Association of Home Builders' & Home Builders' Association q flows  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 Phone: (319) 351-5333 E.mail: hbaofic@cs.com www. iowacityhomes.com HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION Advocates,for homeownership by prontoting standards for quality attd affordablility ~ September 8, 2005 ~ Iowa City Council Members .-.~ C'; crt 410 E. Washington Street __< ~ ,-~ Iowa City Council Members: ~:' I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before xotiI~g on the p/~orpos~d coder Signature '"'/' '/ II1"~~t, \1///e l/lie La h A,ffiliated with Na'li~nal Association of tlome Builders & Fl'otne Builders Association of Iowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 Phone: (319) 351-5333 HBA Fax: (319) 358-2443 E-mail: hbaofic@cs.com www. iowacityhomes.com Advocates.for homeownership by promoting standards' for quality and qffordablility September 8, 2005 ~C--)~ r~ Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: ~"~' I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before ,vr~ng on the proposeaFcode. II Signature ~'_ f. r / Affiliated with National A s.N~iation of tIome Builders & Home Builders Association of Iowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 Phone: (319) 351-5333 HBA ,ax: E-mail: hbaofic@cs.com www.iowacityhomes.com HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION Advocates for homeownership by protnoting standards' for quality and a. ffordablility September 8, 2005 CD Iowa City Council Members C3--5 _,. '""' 410 E. Washington Street ~ ~ Iowa City, IA 52240 ~-< Fr~ Iowa City Council Members: ~ '~' I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before 5 S"atUre' ~;]q - ~ff ~ ' AJ,'filiated with National As'sociation of llome Builders & Home Builders' Assoeiation of lowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 Phone: (319) 351-5333 E-mail: hbaofic@cs.com www.iewacityhomes.com HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION Advocates for homeownership by pro)noting standards .['or quality and qf/brdublility September 8, 2005 ~C) Crt Iowa City Council Members 3:; -~t ©-< -ri 410 E. Washington Street --~ C3 on }'-" Iowa City, IA 52240 .-< r--' Iowa City Council Members: _~/x I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. S{a~ature_,. A, ffiliated with National Ass'ociation o/ ltome BuiMers & Houte Builders Association o/iowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 Phone: (319) 351-5333 HBA Fax: (319) 359-2443 E-mail: hbaofic@cs.com www.iowacityhomes.com HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION Advocates for homeownership by promoting standardx for ~..~. quality and qffordablility September 8, 2005 Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 ~_~ -~- Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. ~i~matu're A. ffiliated with National Association of Home Builders & Honte Builders Association of Iowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 Phone: (319) 351-5333 E.rnail: hbaofic@cs,com www. iowacityhomes.com HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION Advocates for homeownership by protnoting standards fnr ~-~ quality attd affordablility September 8, 2005 Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. S~gna'~ur~-,t A. ffiliated with National Association of tlome Builders' & Home Builders' Association of Iowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 Fax: (319) 358-2443 E-mail: ~l~baofic@cs.com HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION www. io.~ityhomes.com Advocates.for homeownership by protnoting standards,for qualityandq[fordablility September 8, 2005 ..~ Iowa City Council Members ~. .~. 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision · if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before ~ o.~/ne proposed ~ S~gnature~' "~' -'" _~tZq~., A.[filiuted with Nutional Association of Home Builders & Home Builders Associatiou q/'lowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 aA Phone: (319) 351.5333 H Fax: (319) 358.2443 E-mail: hbaofic@cs.com www. iowacityhomes.com HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION Adw~cates.for hnmeownership by promoting standards for quality and qffordablility .....- r~ September 8, 2005 ~C'?~ ~?~ Iowa City Council Members ~ .~ ~o 410 E. Washington Street an Iowa City, IA 52240 .~<~_~ --o Iowa City Council Members: ~-' -~- I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signaturo~"J - ~ ~ 3a. Tr.. ~.~ / ~.~/~,~ A. ffiliated with NationaI Association o. f Home Builders & Home Builders Association of Iowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 Phone: (319) 351-5333 HBA E-mail: hbaofic@cs.com www.iowacityhomes.com HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION Advocates for homeownership by promoting standards ,for quality and qffnrdablility September 8, 2005 Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: Q"~ '~' I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before vo~g off/~ pr)~osed code. Si~nature~' ~i ~ ~/~)~ ~ -~ A[Jdtat~[~ith ~;f~a~,;sociaffon of Ho,ne Builders & Home Builders As,ociatiou of Iowa  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 Phone: (319) 351-5333 E-mail: hbaofic@cs.com www. iowacityhomes.com HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION Advocates for homeownership by promoting standards for '-'-" quality and a. ffordablility C)_ c. ln September 8, 2005 Iowa City Council Members CD r. lt 410 E. Washington Street ~.~ r-" Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before vol:Lng on the proposed code. Signature ,/L/ t'61~ F~l',.Sc..ti er" Affiliated with National Association of Home Builders & Home Builders Associatiou qf lowa Iowa City Area Association of R EA LTORS® Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, lowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code.  438 Highway 1 West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 3~9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org VIEALTOVI~ Iowa City Area Association orr EA LTORS ® Iowa City Council Members O ~ --~ -ri:: =~ 410 E. Washington Street ~ C) cn ['-- Iowa City, IA 52240 .--< t-- ~ Iowa City Council Members: ~ I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current cOde. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · lfthe City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signatur ~-  438 Highway I West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.or9 Iowa City, IA 52246 3~9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR'~ Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 ~ Iowa City Council Members: 7'4 (~ 1 am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that th ~e~ity is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. 'Y' '~' · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature 438 Highway I West 319-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 3~9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR* Iowa Cit Area Association of REA L TORS ® Iowa City Council Members ;t>.~ 410 E. Washin~on S~eet ~ ~ Iowa Ci~, IA 52240 _~ ~ ~ Iowa CiW Council Members: ~ ~ I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa CiW Area Association of REALTORS~. ~ I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the CiW is considering adopting and have outlined my prima~ concerns below. The CiW of Iowa CiW should not impose desi~ standards on residential cons~uction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the CiW. The CiW should not increase lot wides in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases in~as~c~re costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. The proposed code contains a "densiW bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the cu~ent code. In addition, ~e densiW bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with desi~ smdards. ~e densiW needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our communiW's abiliW to provide one of the most affordable ~es of dwellings. ~e CiW should pe~it zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. If the CiW is going to require developers to construct alleys in ce~ain developments, the CiW should assume the long tern mainminance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are ~quired to be cons~ucted by the CiW. Neighborhood meetings should ~ optional, not mandato~. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessiW of the mandato~ meetings and reposing obligations imposed by the proposed code. ~ Level II Sensitive Are~ should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. The CiW should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees ~e not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making si~ificant ch~ges ~garding these ma~ers would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa CiW. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues fu~her with the Land Development Council, Iowa CiW Area Association of REALTORS~ and Greater Iowa CiW Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. -~gnature,..---.,  438 Highway 1 West 319-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org IOwa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOF1~ Iowa City Area Association orr tr, AL TORS ® Iowa City Council Members ' 4 ! 0 E. Washington Street C) ~C~ on I--' Iowa City, IA 52240 .-< Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the lowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature [ 438 Highwag I West 329-338-6460 phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 329-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR~ ¢INpY ~ DELL~.NP Iowa City Area Association of R F, AL TORS ® Iowa City Council Members O ~1 ~ 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 --in "o Iowa City Council Members: ~ ~ I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainanee and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code.  438 Highway 1 West 319-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 5££46 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR® Iowa City Area Association of R F,A LTORS ® Iowa City Council Members "~ 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bOnus'', but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in 'RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signat~r~.,.,..~ ~  438 Highway 1 West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52a46 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR® Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® Iowa City Council Members ~ ~"~ 410 E. Washington Street C) -' [-- iowa City, iA 52240 ~O iowa City Council Members: _ ~ I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · ~ The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiting the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of lowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code.  438 Highway I West 319-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar, org Iowa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR® Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street .~? ~ l--" Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the IoWa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City oflowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiting the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs &the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level H Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature x (>co&~...-k-L~ 9,,-.acr~s ~ ~ x ~M  438 Highway ~ West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar~icaar, org Iowa ~, ~ 5~46 3~9-338-6957 f~ web site: icaar.oro REALTOR® Iowa City Area Association of EAL TORS® I°wa City Council Members ~ 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 ~1'~ ~:~ Iowa City Council Members: ~ I am writing to you as a member &the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®~ I am concerned about a number &provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infiastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be conslyucted by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of lowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code..  438Highway I West $~9-$$8-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa Cit~, IA 5a246 $~9-$$$-6957 fax web siteJ icaar.org REALTOR® Iowa City Area Association of L TORS ® Iowa City Council Members 0 '-' 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 .~9 oa Iowa City CoUncil Members: 7=I~'~ I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City oflowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not.require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with .the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature "7.6 am t s ,5' e.. l /  438 Highway ~ West 3~9-338-646o phone ~mail: icaar~icaar.org Iowa ~, ~ 52~46 3~9-338-6957 f~ web site: icaar.org REALTOR® Iowa City Area Association of R F, ALTORS ® Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 ' Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City Should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code containS a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the develOper to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero, lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one oftbe most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · Iftbe City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the Cityi · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. ~ .... ~~~hwal~Wes~t~~~9~'33~'04 60438 H 9 Y phone e-mail: icaar@icaar, org Iowa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® Iowa City Council Members ~ 410 E. Washington Street ~ "~ Iowa City, IA 52240 ~C-)~ Iowa City CoUncil Members: ~ ~ I am writing to yOu as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®.~ '~ I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keeP housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the city should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions 'with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number &developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®' and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. signing t/ . I w g  438~way ~ West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar~icaar.or~ Iowa ~, ~ 5~46 3~9-338-6957 f~ web site: icaar.org ~EALTO~® Iowa Area Association ofR F. AL TORS ® Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street ~ Iowa City, IA 52240 t. ti Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. ~ I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design &homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs &the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. rll · 438 Highway 1 West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar, org REALTOR® Iowa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org Iowa City Area Association of R EA LTOI1S ® Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street "- lowa City, IA 52240 ~ Iowa City Council Members: CD --' I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS -O ['~ I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that considering adoPting and have outlined my primary concerns below. ~ --. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on ~esidential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiting the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which Zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already, use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature  438 Highway i West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 3~9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR® Iowa City Area Association of R IrA LTORS ® Iowa City Council Members ~_ 410 E. Washington Street ~ IoWa City, IA 52240 ~ r~ "T'[ Iowa City Council Members: ,~ I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development cOde that th ,~ity is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. * The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in, certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity &the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a pOOr decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code.  Highway 1 West -338-6460 phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar, org REALTOR® Iowa City Area Association of R F.A LTORS® 410 E. Washington Street C3.~C~ ~ I-- Iowa City, IA 52240 .~ ['~ Iowa City Council Members: of REALTORS®. I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiting the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affOrdable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of lowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. k.. - q,-to br.,  438 Highway 1 WeSt 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52£46 3~9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org Vli/ALTOVI® Iowa City Area Association of R F,A LTORS® 410 E. Washington Street ~-.~ Iowa City, IA 52240 . 0~.''~ r-"_ Iowa City Council Members: -..~ I am writing to you asa member ofthe Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. '~ I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that tlq~eity is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain develoPments, the City should assume the long term maintainanee and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code.  438 Highway I West 338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org RgALTOR® Iowa Cit!! Area Association of R L TORS ® I°wa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 -n I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. ~ I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that th~ is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. .~ ~ · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residentiai consfl~ction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code.  438 Highwa!l 1 West $~9-$$8-646o phone e-mail: icaar@ieaar, or9 aa^,roa® Iowa City, IA 5£e46 3~9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org Iowa City Area Association orr F, AL TORS ® Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 ~_ Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. --~ I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that th~-~ is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. ''~_ The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential cons~ction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not in~ lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types &dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interi°r lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are reqUired to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association o£REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code.  438Hi#hWay t 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar~icaar.or9 Iowa ~, ~ 5~46 3~9-338-6957 f~ web site: icaar, or~ REALTOR® ,, Iowa City Area Association orr F, AL TORS® Iowa City Council Members tD '" 410 E. Washington Street IOwa City, IA 52240 ' Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as pwposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature/ Hera Ot ~O/1 tlt l [  438 Highway ~ West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar~icaar.ory Iowa ~, ~ 5~46 3~9-338-6957 f~ web site: icaar.org REALTOR® Iowa City Area Association orr F,A L TOPS ® Iowa City Council Members C~ ~r~ 410 E. Washington Street C~ --- - ' Iowa City, IA 52240 ~? e.n ] '" .~ Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. ~ I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs &the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types &dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainanee and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be, a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signatu~re. ~ r~ 438 Hi!lhway 1 West -338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.or!l a~^croa'~ Iowa City, IA 52246 3~9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org Iowa City Area Association of R F, A LTORS® Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA. 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®?~' '-- I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City ise'° considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of' alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number &developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period &time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. B 438 Highway 1 West 319-338-646o phone e.mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR® Iowa City Area Association orr F,A L TOPS ® Iowa City Council Members ~'~ 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 ~ ''< ... Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS~. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City~ considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design &homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by-requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level H Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code.  438 Hi#hway 1 ~Vest 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR® ' Iowa City Area Association of R F. AL TORS ® Iowa Ci~ Co~cil Membe~ 410 E: W~hin~on S~et ~ Iowa CiW, IA 52240 Iowa Ci~ Co,oil Member: I am ~iting to you as a member of the Iowa CiW Area Association of REALTORS~. I am concerned a~ut a number of provisions in the pwposed development c~e ~at the Ci~ is considering adopting ~d have outlined my prim~ con,ms ~low. · The Ci~ of Iowa Ci~ should not im~se desi~ s~d~ds on residential cons~ction. · The desi~ of homes should ~ the consumer's decision, not mandated by ~e CiW. ~e Ci~ should not inc~ lot wides in ~sidential ~nes, ~ p~md by ~e new e~e. Ine~ing lot wides ine~es in~c~ eoas for ~e develo~rs, which inc~ases ~e cost to cons~en. ~e pro~sed co& contains a "&nsi~ bonus", but it is not a si~ificant bonus when comp~ to he c~nt c~e. h addition, ~e densi~ ~nus he~s ~e coa of housing by ~ui~g ~e develo~r to comply wi~ desi~ s~d~s. ~e densiW needs to be increased to cover the eos~ of the requirements and keep housing affor~ble. The pro~sed code drastically r~uees the a~ in which ~r~lot lhe homes e~ be builL which limits o~ eommuni~'s abili~ to provide one of~e most ~or~ble ~s of dwelling. ~e Ci~ should ~it ~ro-lot line homes to ~ built on interior lots in RS-8 ~nes and should not impose desi~ stand,ds on those homes. lf~e Ci~ is going to require develope~ to cons~ct alleys in ce~in development, the Ci~ should ~sume ~e long te~ mainmh~ ~d repair of alleys. It is unfair to b~den residen~ or,ese new subdivisions wi~ the eo~ to repa~ ~d main~in alleys ~at ~ ~qu~ to ~ eons~eted by ~e Ci~. Neigh~o~ m~fings should ~ optional, not m~to~. A n~ber of develo~n already use nei~borhood meetings ~d ~e able to res~nd dir~tly to neighbor's concerns without the necessiW of the mandato~ meethgs and re~aing obligations im~sed by ~e p~ e~e. · ~vel II Sensitive A~ should not ~qui~ use ora Pl~ed ~velopment Overlay. The Ci~ should automatically refund Open Space fees to ~e residents of a subdivision if~e fees ~ not used wi~in a re~nable ~fiod of time. Adopthg ~e p~d development c~e wi~out m~ing si~ifie~t ch~ges ~g~ding ~em maven would ~ a p~r d~ision for ~e ~m~ of Iowa CiW. I encourage you to consider ~ese factors ~d di~uss these issues ~er w~ the L~d ~velopment Co~cil, Iowa CiW Area Association of ~ALTORS~ and Greater Iowa Ci~ Area Home Builders Association ~fore voting on ~e p~sed code. Signature tnrl l t-tor T 438 Highway I West 319-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR® Iowa City Council Members ~ ~ 410 E. Washington Street ~ Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not nmndet~ by thc City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for thc developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of thc most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-$ zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developcm to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level 1I Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Grea~ Iowa City Area Home Builders Aszoci~tion before ' Iowa City Area Association of R F, AL TORS® 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs forthe developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City shOUld assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future oflowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code.  438 Highway I West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 3~9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOH® Iowa City Area Association of RF, A LTORS® Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 owa city Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®~ I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is~ considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when comparod to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring ~e developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. [T~ 438 Hi~lhway I West! 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.or9 Iowa City, IA 52246 3~9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR® Iowa City Area Association orr EA L TORS ® Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with.design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed ex)de. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future oflowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. T 438 Hiyhway I 3~9-338-646o phone icaar@icaar, or~7 West e-mail: Iowa City, IA 5£246 3~9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org FIg:ALTOFI® Iowa City Area Association oraTORS ® - Iowa City Council Members ~ 410 E. Washington Street C) '-' Iowa City, IA 52240 ~C)~ Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. ~ I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared 'to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one oftbe most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to' require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future oflowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature [ f ~iq ~. /x ~ T 438 Highway 1 West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR® Iowa City Area Association of REAL TOPS ® 0 -' IoWa City Council Members .~O~ oa I 410 E. Washington Street ~ Iowa City, IA 52240 .~ -~: Iowa City Council Members: ~ I am writing to you as a member of the IOwa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have oUtlined my primary concerns below. The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. * The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level Il Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signatu~'-'~,~l(~- ~  z 3~9-338-646o phone icaar@icaar.org 438 Highway West e-mail: Iowa City, IA 5£246 3~9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR® Iowa City Area Association of R F,A LTORS® Iowa City Council Members ~ ~ ~ 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 ~.~ .~ Iowa City Council Members: ~ c~ I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zerodot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainanee and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code.  438 Highway ~ West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar~icaar.or9 Iowa ~, ~ 5~46 3~9-338-6957 f~ web site: icaar, or9 REALTOR® Iowa City Area Association orr F,A L TORS ® Iowa City Council Members ~- 410 E. Washington Street ~ ~.~ Iowa City, IA 52240 ED Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®.~ I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is~--~ considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design &homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainanee and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain'alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity &the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater IowaCity Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. S]~ttur~ '  438 Highway I West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 5£246 3~9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR® .... Iowa City Area Association orr EA L TOI1S ® Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to yoU as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by re4uiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use. neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code.  438 Highway ~ West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar~icaar.org Iowa ~, ~ 5~46 3~9-338-6957 f~ web si~e: icaar.org REALTOR® Iowa City Area Association of R EALTORS ® Iowa City Council Members "-'- 410E. Washington Street .~ ~ ~~ Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: '-'--~" I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new cOde. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes Can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. T 438 I-l~ghway 319-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 3~9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR® Iowa City Area Association orr F AL TORS ® Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association &REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level H Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period &time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future &Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signa~~  438 Highway 1 West 319-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 5ee46 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar, org REALTOR® Iowa City Area Association of R F, AL TORS® Iowa City Council Members .~~ ~_n ~ 410 E. Washington Street ~ [~ Iowa City, IA 52240 ~ ,, ~ .. Iowa City Council Members: eo I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainanee and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code.  438 Highway ~ West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar~icaar.or~ Iowa ~, ~ 5~46 3~9-338-6957 f~ web site: icaar.org REALTOR® Iowa City Area AssOciation orr F.A L TORS® Iowa City Council Members IoWa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. The City of Iowa City shOuld not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. IncreaSing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number &developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the~p_yx}~osed code. Signatur~ ' ' ~  488 Highway I West $19-:?,$ - 4 P e-mail: icaar@icaar.org / REALTOR® Iowa City, IA 52246 /~ 3~9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org Iowa City Area Association of It EA L TOPS ® Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street ~ .-'r~..._. Iowa city, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design &homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as propOsed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infi'astmcture costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainanee and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number &developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future oflowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code.  438Highway i West 319-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar, org REALTOR' Iowa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org Iowa City Area Association orr F. AL TORS ® Iowa City Council Members . ~.~ 410 E. Washington Street "~ IowaCity, IA 52240 CD -'- Iowa City Council Members: ~ m I am writing to you asa member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that th% City iseo considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. The City oflowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents oftbese new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development Code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature T 438 Highway 1 West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar~icaar, or9 Iowa ~, ~ 5~46 3~9-338-6957 f~ web site: icaar, or9 REALTOR* Iowa City Area Association orr EA L TORS ® Iowa City Council Members ~ ~ ~ 410 E. Washington Street C3 -" Iowa City, IA 52240 ~ ~C3~ ~.n [-" Iowa City Council Members: ~7=j,~. "g ~ I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS .~ ~ I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. The City oflowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the' current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number &developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require'use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. S,gnature / ,/~E~t tn gt t~./~t'//t.~  438 High--est 319-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar, org Iowa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org ~IEALTOR® Iowa City Area Association orr EA L TORS Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street IOwa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: "~ I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association Of REALTORS®.> I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of hOUsing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and.maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code.  438 Highway I West 319-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR® Iowa City Area Association of R F, AL TORS® Iowa City Council Members __ 410 E. Washington Street O --. Iowa City, lA 52240 ~C-)~ e.n Iowa City Council Members: ~ 7gr .v27' I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®.' eo I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. .The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costS for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing.affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. T 438 Highway I West 319-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 3~9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR® Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council M,mbers: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®~ I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code ~hat the City is considering adopting and I have outlined my primary concerns below. The City of Iowa City should NOT impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, NOT mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths inere~es infrastmcage costs for the developers, which · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to b~ increased to covc'r the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, thus limiting THE community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line hemes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · IF the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be consUucmt by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, NOT mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by thc proposed code. · Level H Sensitive Areas should NOT require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Slmce fees to the residents of a subdivision ifthe fees are not used within a reasonable period oftime. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Caeater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. 1000 Sth St Ooralvill®, IA 5~41 Phone: {3~9} I~4-8044 £ach C~ioo Indop~ndentl¥ Ownod and O~ratod Iowa City Area Association orr F,A L TORS ® Iowa City Council Members ~C")~ e~ 410 E. Washington Street -~ ~ Iowa City, IA 52240 C) ~ Iowa City Council Members: "'<~ t~'~ I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®.21g __,~a I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City i~,~ considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types &dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainanee and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the Cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number &developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code.  438 Highway 1 West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 5a246 3~9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar, org REALTOR® Iowa City Area Association of R F, AL TORS Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number &developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not reqUire use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future &Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature ~ ~t r' I ¢ ~ ~. /~/1; I t ,br" i~ 438 Highway I West 319-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52e46 3~9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR® Iowa City Area Association of It F,A LTORS® Iowa City Council Members ---~iC')~ 410 E. Washington Street -~.~ Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainanee and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature ~~rtI ~ B · 438 Highway I West 319-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org IoWa City, IA 5£246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar, org REALTOR® Iowa City Area Association ofR F.A LTORS ® Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 CD '''~ Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction, The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings shouId be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposext by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. I 488 HighWag ~ West 8~9-888-646o phone e-mail: ieaar@icaar.or9 Iotoa Ci~, IA 52246 8~9-888-6957 fax web site: icaar.or9 REALTOR® Iowa City Area Association of R F, ALTORS® Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa ci,, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards'on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infi'as~c~ costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types &dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. ~gnature U ,v~/ ~/'~l ~  438Highway 1 West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR® Iowa City Area Association of REA LTORS® Iowa City Council Members ~ ~ ~ 410 E. Washington Street ~r'~C'3 ~ I-'- Iowa City, IA 52240 -'~ m Iowa City Council Members: . ~ I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. ~ I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiting the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings.~ The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term malntainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are requirext to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code.  438 Highway 1 West 319-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 5a246 3~9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR® Iowa City Area Association of F,A L TORS® Iowa City Council Members --~ 0 410 E. Washington Street ''''<.~ ..~ ['Fl[~j Iowa City, IA 52240 ~ ~, Iowa City Council Members: ~ -' I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City oflowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number &developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. ~ Iowa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOi:I® Iowa City Area Association orr F.A L TORS ® Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street '~r'~ "~ ' ['~ Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleysin certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. B 438Highway 1 3]9-338-6460 phone 'e-mail: icaar@ieaar.org West Iowa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org R£ALTOR® 'Iowa City. Area orr F, AL TORS® Association IOwa City Council Members .410 E. Washington Street IOwa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City oflowa City should not imPose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · , The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is goingto require develoPers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. $ Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City, I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before vot, o )  438 Highway 1 West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR® Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS m Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. B 438 Highway ] West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR~"' Iowa City Area Association of F,,AL TORS ® Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street C) -<~'x~ Iowa City, IA 52240 .~? Iowa City Council Members: ~ ~ I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®> I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature C h r, i,~.I.[~,l e_.. Cgx~f2[fle/[  438Highway 1 West 319-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 3~9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR~" Iowa City Area Association orr F.A LTORS ® - Iowa City Council Members ,_< ~ '~ ~ 410 E. Washington Street ::1: ~r~ Iowa City, IA 52240 ~ 7~ ~ > -- Iowa City Council Members: m I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. ! am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to. cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · lithe City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature r" '~~['~O~ }~x~---[ ~  438 Highway ~ 3~9-338-646o phone icaar@icaar.org West e-mail: lOwa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR~ Iowa City Area Association of REA LTORS® Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street ._~ © {,n i Iowa City, lA 52240 City Council Members: Iowa I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before Ojon the proposed code. Signaturepo/q/q~ ~f ~r5 B ~ 3~9-338-646o phone icaar@icaar.or9 438 Highway West e-mail: Iowa City, IA 52246 3]9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR~" Iowa City Area Association of REA LTORS® Iowa City Council Members CD 410 E. Washington Street ~ C3 cn ['-- Iowa City, IA 52240 "-'< Iowa City Council Members: _.~_~ ;-"'- | am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level Il Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. B 438 Highway I West e-mail: 319-338-646o phone icaar@icaar.or9 Iowa City, IA 5ee46 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR~ Iowa City Area Association of R F.A L TORS ® Iowa City Council Members CD ~ m"~ ~ 410 E. Washington Street ~ O o'~ ~ Iowa City, IA 52240 :'<~---rl-o ITl Iowa City Council Members: 7x~ ~ I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. ! am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City oflowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, lowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature VD ~,)d ~,(' ~  438 Highway 1 West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 5ee46 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.or9 REALTOR~ _ Iowa City Area Association of REA LTORS® Iowa City Council Members co 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. --- I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is "' considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Sig~natureX~ · v-  438 ighwag 1 3~9-338-646o phone icaar@icaar.org e-mail: Iowa City, IA 52246 329-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR~ Iowa City Area A sociation of REALTORS® Iowa City Council Members -- 410 E. Washington Street O ~ m -Ii Iowa City, IA 52240 ~ C) cr~ [-- _-<r- ,rT1 Iowa City Council Members: ~ ~ :::x:~ I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®.)~ ~o I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature .~  438 Highway 1 West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR~" Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street "--' ' ' Iowa City, IA 52240 ~:~' Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level IF Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signa~re ~ L , ~  438 Highwag ~ West 3~9-SS8-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar, org Iowa Cittj, IA 52246 S19-338-6957 fax web site: icaar, org FtEALTOI:¥~ Iowa City Area Association orr EA LTORS ® Iowa City Council Members ~ 410 E. Washington Street C') Iowa City, IA 52240 -x~ -1'] Iowa City Council Members: .~ r.Cd I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. ~ ;x: I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that th~l:~;ity is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. I 8//'' 43 zgnway 1 West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.or9 Iowa City, IA 52246 3~9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR~ Iowa City Area Association orr EA L TORS ® _ Iowa City Council Members ~ ?2 on .r'-' 410 E. Washington Street r-tn 'x~ ~ Iowa City, IA 52240 ~ 7r~ ~ Iowa City Council Members: 21~ m I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. B 438 Highway 1 West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 5~246 3]9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR~" Iowa City Area Association of REA LTORS® Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 ,~? c.n I-'- Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS~. l am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · lfthe City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. B 438Highway ] West 319-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org lowa City, IA 5e246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR<° Iowa City Area Association of R F,A L TORS ® Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street .~? o'~ Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · lfthe City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Si~iture ~ . _ B 438 Highway 1 West 3]9-338-6460 phone e-mail: icaar@icaar, org IoWa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR'~ Iowa City Area Association orr EA L TORS® Iowa City Council Members ~ ''< ~-° ~"T] 410 E. Washington Street ,-< v-- [-1"] Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. gignature  438 Highway 1 West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR~ SEF'--13--2885 18:35 AM 'CENTURY21PROPERTYPROF 319 88? 2184 F'. 01 Iowa City Council Members ~ © ~ ---- 410 E. Washington Street -5 ? c.n Iowa City, IA 52240 ~ -o Iowa City Council Members: ~ ~ I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about.a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · Thc City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zcro-iot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. - If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long-term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory, A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code, · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable per/od oft/me. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. l encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before vot/ng on the proposed code. ' .t Iowa City Area Association of R F, A L TORS® Iowa City Council Members ~ -< m ~ 410 E. Washington Street ,_< ~ ~ Iowa City, IA 52240 tw~ "~ Iowa City Council Members: ~, '_2.' I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · lfthe City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. B 438 Highway 1 West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 3~9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR'-" Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® Iowa City Council Members (2) 410 E. Washington Street 2:; ~ rn Iowa City, IA 52240 C') -<' ,_"° ~ Iowa City Council Members: ' ~ "o ~ 1 am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS .~. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City ~ considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · lfthe City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code.  438 Highway ~ West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR~° :SEP--1~--2005 10 :~5 AM CENTURY21PROPERTYPROF ~19 887 2104 f. 02 Iowa city Council Members .=< r-- [']'] 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. ! am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City oflowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design ofhom~s should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to constlmers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cove~ the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable, · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able 1o respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable per/od of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss those issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Oreater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the_proposed code. Signature SEP.~a. E005 1:57PM COLD~ELL ~RNKER MORTH H0.918 P.1×Z Iowa City Cour~cil Members 410 E. Washing'ton Street 0 Iowa City, IA 52240 ~; ~, er2 Iowa City Cotmeil Members: CD -d m"v I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association ofREALTORS~-< ~ -~ I am concerned about a number of provisions in t_he proposed development code that considering adopting. It appears to be more about curb appeal than about getting~J~ffi'flies into homes. Thus, I have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, xvh~eh increases the cost to consumers, The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design s*s_ndards. The density will need to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordabl,. · The proposed code drastie~.lly reduces the areas in which zero.lot line homes eau be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City of Iowa City should be more concerned about how to get younger families into these communities, The City ~hould permit zero.lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. Note; tho City of Iowa City has abandoned all responsibility for alleys in the existing neighborhoods and we all are currently seeing the results of that design standard or flaw (or lack of appeal). · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory, A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Creater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. We all love Iowa City for its diversity. Let the 'people' decide how they want to design their homes. Council Members ~'~ 410 E. Washington Street 14 East Benton Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City, IA 52240 Phone 319-358-1004 Iowa City Council Members: Fax 319-358-9309 I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that Shelly Streb-Alberts the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. Cell 319-331-2654 sstrebre@aol.com · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not Mary Io Streb mandated by the City. Cell 319-331-0575 · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by jo1811 @earthlink.net the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. * The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. e Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Sep 13 05 ll:~2a Shell~ Streb-Rlberts 319-358-9309 p. 1 City Council Members ---< r-- 410 E. Washington Street 14 East Benton Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City, IA 52240 Phone 319-358-1004 Iowa City Council Members: Fax 319-358-9309 I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that Shelly Streb-Alberts the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. Cell 3 ] 9-331-2654 sstrebre@aol.com · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential ~' construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not ~~~x~ mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by  the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys, It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. ' Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. : ~ · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development ., ;~. .:;:~. ,, :.:.., ~.,;:; ,..:~? ::~; Overlay. · ~ * The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Prudential - 250 12th Avenue, Suite 150 Coralville, IA 52241 2005SEP 15 PH 2:07 Bus 354-8118 Fax 319 354-0921 CITY' CLERK www. pruic.com Iowa City Council Members IOWA CITY, IOWA 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainanee and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level li Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development.code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. ~' An independently owned and operated member of The Prudential Real Estate Affiliates, Icc SEP-13-2005 12:53 LEPIC KROEGER REALTORS 3193518035 LEPIC-KROEGER, R AI,TARg®___ _________ __.____.._ .-<r- IT1 2346 Moron Trek Blvd. · Iowa City, IA 52246 · (319) 351-881 Iowa Ci~ Co.oil Members 410 E. Wa~ingon S~e~ Iowa CiW, ~ 52240 Iowa CiW Council Mem~m: I m ~i~ng to you ~ a mem~r of~e Iowa CiW ~ As~iafion of ~ALTORS~. I m concem~ about a numar of provisions in ~e pm~d developm~t ~de ~m ~e CiW is considedng ~o~ing ~d have outlined my pfim~ con,ms ~low. ~e CiW of Iowa Ci~ should n~ imam d~i~ s~ on ~idenfial ~n~on_ desi~ of homes should M ~o ~nsmer's d~ision, not ~dated ~ ~e Ciw. ~e Ci~ should not inm~e lot ~s in msid~tial ~nes, as p~s~ ~ ~e n~ c~e. lnc~g l~ wi~s ine~s in~cm~ eom for ~e develop, which inches ~e cost to ~e pm~sed e~o con,ns a '*d~si~ ~nus", but it is n~ a si~ffic~t bonm w~ ~ ~ e~t code. In addit~n, ~e ~s~ ~nus in~ ~e co~ of housing by ~quifing d~elo~ to comply M~ de~ ~s. ~e densiW needs to ~ ~cm~ed to ~v~ ~e costa of~e ~u~men~ ~d k~ housing ~o~ie. - ~e pm~ ~e ~i~ly ~u~s ~e ~ in which ~r~l~ line homes c~ M buil~ which limi~ o~ c~m~iw's abiliw to ~vide o~ of~e moa ~o~bte ~s of dwellings. ~e CiW 'should ~it ~lot line homes to be built on interior 1o~ in RS-8 zones ~d should not im~ desi~ stands on ~o~ homes. lf~e Ci~ is gong to ~uim develo~m m ~n~ct all~s in ~in developm~m, ~e should assume the long term maima~ce ~d ~pak of alleys, tt is unfak to b~den msidems of these new suMivisions with ~e cost to repair ~d maimain alleys that ~e required to be ~as~e~ by ~e Ci~. - Nei~rh~ m~ should ~ o~i~al, not ~dato~. A nm~r ofdevelo~m a~y ~ ~~ m~ ~d ~ able to ~nd d~ly to ~i~r's ~n~ms M~out n~ of~ ~dato~ m~ ~d ~g obligations ~sed by ~e pm~ c~e. ~e C~ sh~ld automafimlly m~nd ~ S~ f~ to ~e ~id~B ofa ~sion if~ f~s a~ not ~ w~in a ~nable ~ of time. Ad~t~g ~ pm~ devei~ ~ ~ ~ ~f~ ~ ~ing would ~ a ~r d~ion for ~e ~m of lo~ C~. I ~mge you to ~dd~ ~ fa~ discuss the~ issues fu~her with the Land ~velo~ent Council, Iowa City ~ ~ion of ~AL"I'ORS~ ~d G~at~ Iowa CiW ~a Home Builde~ As~imion ~m voting on ~e pm~s~ ~~ TOTnL F'.01 09/13/2005 15:03 FAX 319 624 9120 CORRIDOR CONNECTION REAL ~ ICAAR ~002 Cedar Rapids I0wa City Corridor Connection Realty :-qC~ ~ 7--' Iowa City Council Members 410 E. W~hin~on S~t Iowa CiW, IA 52240 Iowa CiW Council Mem~: I m ~iting to you ~ a mem~r of~e Iowa CiW A~a A~imion of ~ALTORS~. I am con~m~ a~ut a nm~r of provisions in tho pm~ development c~e ~at the City is considering ~o~ing a~ ~vc ~i~ my ~ ~ ~. ~ CiW of Iowa Ci~ ~id nm im~ d~i~ ~& on r~idential cons~ction. ~ ~i~ of~ ~M ~ ~ ~r's d~i~, not m~d by the CiW. Th~ Ci~ ~d ~ ~ ~ w~~ ~ ~~ ~~ e ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~, ~ ~ ~ ~ a si~i~t ~n~ when ~ ~ i~ m ~ ~ ~ of~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ng ~~. * lf~ C~ is ~ ~ ~e~~s ~ ~ ~~~ ~ Ci~ ~d ~ ~ 1~ t~ ~~ ~ ~r of alleys. It is ~fair to ~ ~i~ of~ ~ s~~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ma~tain alley~ ~ ~t 11 ~nsifive A~ ~uld n~ ~qui~ u~ ora Plann~ ~vel~meni * ~e City ~ a~~ ~d~d ~ ~ f~ ~ ~ ~ ora Ado~ng the pro~d development c~c without making significant changes regarding these ~s would ~ a p~r d~ision for the futu~ of Iowa City. 1 encourage you to c, onsidor these ~actor.s a~d d~sc, uss these issues 'fi.~her wi(h, the Land Development Council Iowa Ci~ Ama Association of REA[ rl'ORfi~ and Greater Iowa City ~oa Home Builders Associ~ voting on the propo~d 206 Main Street P.O. Box 38 2721 120th St. NE Suite C Solon, Iowa 52333 www. corridorconnection.com Swisher, Iowa 52338 319-624-9123 fax: 319-624-9120 319-857-9123 fax: 319-857-9126 09/13/2005 15:02 FAX 319 624 9120 CORRIDOR CONNECTION REAL -~ ICAAR [~001 Cedar Rapids I0wa City Corridor Connection Realty Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 ['71 "~ Iowa City Council Members: " I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am eoncemed about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlin~ my primm3r ~ bekn~. The City of. iowa City should not impose d~sign standards on residential construction. Tim d~ign of hom~ should la~ tim e, onsunmr's d~ision, not mandated by the City. The City should not ima~a~ 1~ widllx~ in ~dm~ial ~, m ~ by tim ~t.-~ The im~aosed eod~ etmmim a "d~sity bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when to I~ in~a~a,'~l to ~o~ tl~ ~ oftl~ nXla~ and k~'p ho~ing affordable. b~iit, whi~' limits oar ~nmntmity's ability to provid~ one ofti~ most affordabk: types ofd~tling~ II~ City should pmnit .~lot line homes to be built on inttn%r lois in · If tim City is ~ ~o m~im ~~ ~ comm~ :gl~s ia City should assmne k long term maintainanee and repair of alleys. It is unfair to Imtnlaa residents of these new subdivi~ons with the ~ to repair and maintain alleys already me n~igh&,d~ml m~ and am able to respoml directly to neighbor's - Level H Sensitive Areas should not require use cfa Planned Development Overlay. o The City should automatically mitred Open ~ fees to tl~ residents cfa subdivision if th~ fees' am rot used within a nm~mable Imdod of time. Adopting tho proposed development eerie without making significant changes regarding these matters would bo a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. tenc. ourage you to consider thc. se £:-~ctors and Ois4.'4vgs !hese issues fi.rather with the {.,and Development Council,. Iowa C~W Area Ass~:ciation of REA LSI*ORS~ '.and Gre~ater lowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed 206 Main Street P.O. Box 38 2721 120th St. NE Suite C Solon, I0wa 52333 www. c0rrid0rc0nnecti0n.c0m Swisher, 10wa 52338 319-624-9123 fax: 319-624-9120 319~857-9123 fax: 319-857-9126 09/13/2005 15:03 FAX 319 624 9120 CORRIDOR CONNECTION REAL ~ ICAAR ~003 Cedar Rapids I0wa City Corridor Connection Realty Iowa City Council Members ~C)_~ rnac~ 410 E. Washington Street ~ ~ ~"~ ~ Iowa City, IA 52240 --~ C) C,q .I--' Iowa City Council Members: ~ ~U 'ny I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTOR~. ~- I am concerned abe. ut a number of proVisions in the proposed development code that the Cit~:~s considering adopting, and have outlined my primary ~ below_ · The City of iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes rdm~ld be the eoasumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not incan~se lot widll~s ia msidemlai ~mes~ as im~laOSmt by th~ new code. Jnonmsing lot widlhs im:anms~ ~ ~ ~ ~ which inenmses the cost to cramming. · ~ pmlmsmt cod~ cmllains & "density bonus", [mt il is not a significant bonus when m be increased ia eover tim eosls or,be mquimmems and keep housing affoatable. b~ii~, whi~ limila oar ~ommmaity's ability to provide one or,be mos~ affordable types · If the City is going to ~nnl~i~ dew:lopers ~ eom~mscl ~lleys in ca:flain deve~~ i~ City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to bmden ~:sidems of these new subdivisions with the coat to ~ and maintain alleys · N~~slm~tldbeoplimm~.notmamiato~_ Anmnberofdevelopers already t~se neighborhood meetings and a~ able to reslmmi directly to neighbor's imposed'by the proposed code. * Level Il Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City shou~d.auUnnatically ~'fu~fl Open Slmee fees to the ~esklen~ of a subdivision if t~ fees are no~ used w[tl~in a reasoaab~ period oftime. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regard lng these matters wcmld be a poor decision for the future &Iowa City. I encourage you to c, onsider these .fi.qctors ::p_~d dJ~,:,t~ss th_ese Jss0es fi~rl'her w.i~h the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Ass~ciation of g [.:,A L' t'ORS~3 and: Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed co(lc, 206 Main Street P.O. Box ~8 2721 120th St. NE Suite C Solon, I0wa 52~33 www. c0rrid0rc0nnecti0n.c0m Swisher, I0wa 52338 319-624-9123 fax: 319-624-9120: 319-857-9123 fax: 319-857-9126 Iowa City Area Association of REA LTORS® Iowa City Council Members 410 E: Washington Street .-< r-- FT'] Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. / sign/ature t/~  438 Highway ~ West phone e-mail: icaar~icaar.org 319-338-646o lowa Ci~, ~ 5~46 3~9-338-6957 f~ web site: icaar.org REALTOR*~ Iowa City Area Association orr F,A TORS ® Iowa City Council Members C') ''<~'x~ 410 E. Washington Street --~ Iowa City, IA 52240 ~-< Iowa City Council Members: ~,~ 7q .~. I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature~/..~-; [ /  438 Highway i 319-338-646o phone icaar@icaar.or West e-mail; IOwa City, IA 52246 $19-358-6957 fax web site: REALTOR® LEPIC KROEGER REALTORS® 2346 Mormon Trek Blvd. · Iowa City, IA 52246 · (319) 351-881 Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street :~ C-~ c~ [-'-' Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: " I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature Sep 14 05 09: OSa Westwinds Real Estate 319 248 3747 p. 1 ," " Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street ~ -<: ~ . ~ _ Iowa City, IA 52240 -~ Iowa City Council Members: - I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the Cit? is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not ~nandated by the City. · The City Should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments~ thc City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. 438 Highway ~ West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaur®icuc~r.~r!~ Iowa Ci~, ~ 52246 319'338-6957 f~ ~veb site: Se~ 14 05 OS: 0Sa [~e~t,,,imds Real E~tate 31S 248 3747 ' Iowa Area Associa on orr ® Iowa Ci~ Council Members ~.~ 410 E, Washin~on S~et Iowa Ci~, IA 52240 Iowa Ci~ Council Members: ' [ am writing to you as a member of the Iowa Ciw Area Association of REALTORS~ I am concerned about a number of provisions in }he proposed development code ~at the Ci~ considering adopting and have outlined my prima~ concerns below. The Ci~ of Iowa City should not impose design s~ndards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the Ci~. The Ci~ should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as propomd by the new code. Incre~ing lot widths incre~es inffas~cture costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "densi~ bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to ~e cu~ent code. In addition, ~e densi~ bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with desi~ smd~ds. The densi~ needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the ~eas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our communi~'s abili~ to provide one of the most affor~ble B,pes of dwellings. The Ci~ should pe~it zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots iu RS-8 zones and should not impose desi~ standards on those homes. If the Ci~ is going to require developem to cons~uct alleys in certain developments, the Ci~ should assume the long tern maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that am required to be cons~ucted by the Ci~. Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandato~. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessi~ of the mandato~ meetings and reposing obligations imposed by the proposed code. · ~ve111 Sensitive Am~ should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without m~ing si~ificant ch~ges regarding these ma~ers would be a p~r decision for the ~ture of Iowa Ci~. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa Ci~ Area Association of REALTORS~ and Greater Iowa Ci~ Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. ~i~n&ure , 438 Highway 1 West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaarq, qca~r..m.~/ a[ALTO~'~' IOWa ~'~, ~ 52246 3~9-338-6957 f~ web site: icaar.org 09/13/2005 10:06 FAX 3193967664 CEDARRAPIDS * IC ~002/oo2 5741 C Street SW · Suite C ' Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52404 · Phone: (319) 841-2155 Fax: · (1 Iowa Cit7 Counci! Memb~s 410 E. Was~toa S~rcct ~owa ~, ~ 5~40 Z ~ ~t~ to ~ou as a m~b~ o~t~¢ Iowa ~ ~ ~s~oa o~TOES~. ~e ~ity shoul~ aot ~c~se lot w~dt~ ~ r~id~t~] zoa~, as p~opos~ ~y code. ~c~s~8 lot wid~ ~c~s~ i~as~c~e ~sts ~o~ ~e dcvc]op~s, w~ich ~s~ ~¢ cost to · ~c propos~ ~dc co~ s "d~W ~o~", ~ut it ~s ~ot a s~i~at bo~us ~mpar~ to ~c c~t code. ~ ad~tio~ t~c dc~i~ ~aus ~c~s~ ~c cost ~o~8 by ~u~a~ ~e d~c]op~ to compl~ w~ ~i~ s~. ~c de~i~ ~o ~¢ ~s~ to co~ ~¢ ~s~ o~t~e ~~s ~d ~ ~o~ a~o~c. ~c ~oposcd code ~ast~ca~ ~uc~ ~¢ a~s ~ w~ch z~o-]o~ ]i~¢ ~omcs ca~ bc b~t, w~ch l~m~ o~ co~u~tfs a~i~ ~o p~o~dc oac o~c most a~o~b]c ~S-~ zoa~ ~d should ~ot impose d~i~ s~a~ oa ~osc b~dca ~Jd~ o~cse aew sub~s~o~ w~ ~¢ cost to ~a~ ~d ~ta~ a~cys a~dy usc ae~Sh~d m~tia~s aad a~e a~]c to ~po~d d~cfly to ~pos~ ~ thc p~oposcd · ~c] ~ S~ti~¢ ~s should aot r~e use o~a ~]~ Dcve]opm~t O~lay. · ~c ~ity shoed auto~t~ca~ ~e~d Opc~ Space ~c~ to ~c ~ide~s o~a su~sioa Adopt~ ~c p~oposcd dcv¢]opm~t code ~thout ~8 s~~ c~a~ ~c8a~8 ~t~s would ~e a ~ d~is~oa ~o~ ~e ~c o~ ~owa ~. ~ c~co~asc you to co~id~ th~c ~acmrs ~d ~scuss ~c ~ssu~ ~ ~th thc ~ad D¢~clopm~t ~ouac~, Iowa ~t~ SEP-08-2005 14:5~ LEPIC KROEGER REALTORS 5195518035 P.Oi/Oi ,,7- -"-Iowa City Area Association of RF ALTORS® o Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. i am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. The City o£Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys, it is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · NeighborhOod meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if thc fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the futur~ of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. 438 Highway J West 3J9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa Ci~, ~ 5~246 3~9'338-6957 ~ web site: icaanor9 REALTOR~ TOTAL P.91 FILED SEP ! 5 PH 08 CiTY CLERK IOWA IOWA August 30, 2005 Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you not only as a REALTOR® but as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® as well. I am greatly concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City of Iowa City is considering adopting and have outlined the primary concerns below: The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones as proposed by this new code. Increasing the width of residential lots will thus increase the overall cost for development. This overall increase will as a result be passed on to the consumer causing housing to be less affordable. The City of Iowa City should not be granted the power to impose design standards on residential construction. The design of a home should be left to the customers to determine. Developers and Builders will produce products that sell. Telling consumers what they like by enforcing a design standard would be a mistake in our marketplace. The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes may be built. This move would again limit our cemmunity's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of housing in our market today. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots of RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards. The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but this se called "bonus" is very minimal when compared to the current code. In addition this bonus will also increase the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density would then have to increase simply te cover the cost of these new requirements so that housing could remain affordable. If the City is going to require developer's to construct alleys in Certain developments, the City should assume the long term care, maintenance and repair of these alleys. It is unreasonable, not to mention unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required by the City. Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. > Level H Sensitive Areas should not require use of Planned Development Overlay. The City should automatically refund the Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development cede without making substantial changes regarding these concerns will be an extremely peor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to deeply consider all of these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Thank You, RE/MAX Premier Properties Licensed to Sell Real Estate in the State of Iowa~' Premier Properties 1006 $"' Street .~ Coralville, Iowa 52241 i Office: (319) 354-8644 Iowa Cit j Area Association of F,A L TORS ® Iowa City Council Members ~: 410 E. Washington Street C) '<-..'x~ ---,."'f'] Iowa City, IA 52240 ~? Iowa City Council Members: ~ I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development cOde without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature 438 Highway ~ West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fox web site: icaar.org REALTORc' _ Iowa City Area Association orr F,A LTORS ® 410 E. Washington Street ~ -< Iowa City, IA 52240 "-'< ~, 'x~ ITl Iowa City Council Members: ~ 2El I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. c~ ! am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS~8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · lfthe City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature  438 Highway I West 319-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 5~246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR*: Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® Iowa City Council Members © .~~-t~ __-!-] 410 E. Washington Street --~ © ~ I-- Iowa City, IA 52240 '-< Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature  438 Highway 1 West 319-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52£46 3~9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR~ Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® Iowa City Council Members -o -T'] 410 E. Washington Street ~, ? em t ....... Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: ~ 7x~ .~. ! am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · lfthe City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature ]~ .~ .  438 Highway ] West 319-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR*' Iowa Cit!t Area Association of F,A LTORS ® Iowa City Council Members ~-~ 410 E. Washington Street ¢:;'.~_~ Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the lowa City Area Association of REALTORS®.~ I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that t~City ise~ considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. S~g~.~n[tt'ure -- _ B 438 Highway ] West 3]9-338-6460 phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org IOwa City, IA 5~246 3]9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR~ Iowa City Area Association of REA LTORS Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. l am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of lowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code.  438 Highway I West 319-$38-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.or9 Iowa City, IA 52246 $~9-$$8-6957 fax web site: icaar.or9 REALTORc" Iowa City Area Association of RF. A LTORS® Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. c:~ I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level Il Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code.  438 Highway 1 West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 3~9-338-6957 fax web site: REALTORc"' Iowa City Area Association of R EAL TORS ® Iowa City Council Members ---~ ~-~,C3 .... _.L.It 410 E. Washington Street -~ Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the Current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level Il Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. B 438 Highway 1 West 3]9-338-6 e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR® Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® Iowa City Council Members __ 410 E. Washington Street ,~ ~ cr~ F-' Iowa city, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: o- I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · lfthe City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. T 438 Highway I West 329-338-6460 phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org IOwa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR~' Iowa City Area Association orr EA L TORS ® Iowa City Council Members C3~ m 410 E. Washington Street ,~ ~ c,n Iowa City, IA 52240 r'rn .~ Iowa City Council Members: B:~ c:~ I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Sig ?na~{e z'~/~'-~  438 Highway ~ West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar~icaar.org Iowa Ci~, ~ 52~46 3~9-338-6957 f~ web site: icaar.org flEALTOR~ Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street ~ -x> ['FI Iowa city, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. 1 encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature B 438 Highway ~ West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.or9 IOwa City, lA 52246 3~9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar, or9 REALTOR*' Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code cOntains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code.  1438 Hiohwa~] 1 West 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.or9 IOwa City, IA 52246 3~9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.or9 REALTOR'" Iowa Cited Area Association orr F,A L TORS ® Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 --~ Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®? I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City i~~:~ considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature ~-~f~l~_~. ~ ~,_~_~ bO  438 Highway 1 West 319-338-646o e-mail: icaar@icaar.org phone Iowa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR~ Iowa City Area Association orr EAL TORS ® Iowa City Council Members ~ ''< 'x~ ~ 410 E. Washington Street ,~? ~n ~ Iowa City, IA 52240 (D_~~ ~ ~ ~ Iowa City Council Members: ' 1 am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future oflowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. I-  438 Highway 1 West $19-$$8-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.or9 IOwa City, IA 52246 3~9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR*~ Iowa City Area Association orr F,A LTORS ® Iowa City Council Members (22) 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 CD -'< Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS~ I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that~e City~ considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Si~'nature  438Highwa~l 1 West e-mail: 319-338-646o phone icaar@icaar.org IOwa Cit!I, lA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR® Iowa City Area Association orr F,A LTORS ® Iowa City Council Members "~ r~ 410 E. Washington Street ~ Iowa City, IA 52240 _Z~ © Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · lfthe City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code /~ Signature ,  1 3~9-338-646o phone icaar@icaar.or9 438 Hiyhway West e-mail; Iowa City, IA 52246 3J9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR* Iowa City Area Association orr F,A LTORS Iowa City Council Members ~ ~ t..n [--' 410 E. Washington Street ~'-" ' Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when comPared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level Il Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code.  438 Highway I 319-338-646o phone icaar@icaar.org West IOwa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR® Iowa City Area Association orr F,A LTORS ® Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street 3~ ~ m Iowa City, IA 52240 CD m .,_" Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. c:~ I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is~o considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code.  438 Highway I West 319-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar, org Iowa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTORc~, lou a Cittj Area Association of RF, ALTORS® Iowa City Council Members CITY CLERK 410 E. WashinVon S~eet ~0WA C~ ~OWA Iowa ciw, IA 52240 Iowa CiW Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa CiW Area Association of REALTORS~. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the CiW is considering adopting and have outlined my prima~ concerns below. · The CiW of Iowa Ci~ should not impose desi~ standards on residential cons~uction. . The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the Ciw. The CiW should not incre~e lot wides in residential ~nes, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot wides increases in~as~cmre costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. The proposed code contains a "densiW bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the cu~ent code. In addition, ~e densiW bonus increases ~e cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with desi~ stand,ds. The densiW needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our communiW's abiliW to provide one of the most affordable ~es of dwellings. ~e Ci~ should pemit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose desi~ standards on those homes. If the Ci~ is going to require developers to cons~uct alleys in ce~in developments, the CiW should assume the long tern maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair m burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maimain alleys that are mqui~d to ~ cons~ucted by the CiW. Neighborhood meetings should ~ optional, not m~dato~. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessiW of the mandato~ meetings and repoffing obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. The CiW should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making si~ificant ch~ges ~garding these ma~ers would be a poor decision for the future of lowa CiW. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues fu~her with the Land Development Council, Iowa CiW Area Association of REALTORS~ and Greater Iowa CiW Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code, Signature  438 Highway ~ West e-mail: 319-~8-646o phone icaar~icaar.org IOwa ~, ~ 52~46 3~9-338-6957 f~ web site: icaar.org ~EALTO~c~ FILED 005 SEP 1 5 2:08 CITY CLERK · IOWA 10WA August 30, 2005 Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you not only as a REALTOR® but as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® as well. I am greatly concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City of Iowa City is considering adopting and have outlined the primary concerns below: The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones as proposed by this new code. Increasing the width of residential lots will thus increase the overall cost for development. This overall increase will as a result be passed on to the consumer causing housing to be less affordable. The City of Iowa City should not be granted the power to impose design standards on residential construction. The design of a home should be left to the customers to determine. Developers and Builders will produce products that sell. Telling consumers what they like by enforcing a design standard would be a mistake in our marketplace. The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes may be built. This move would again limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of housing in our market today. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots of RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards. The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but this so called "bonus" is very minimal when compared to the current code. In addition this bonus will also increase the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density would then have to increase simply to cover the cost of these new requirements so that housing could remain affordable. If the City is going to require developer's to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term care, maintenance and repair of these alleys. It is unreasonable, not to mention unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required by the City. Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. ~' Level H Sensitive Areas should not require use of Planned Development Overlay. The City should automatically refund the Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making substantial changes regarding these concerns will be an extremely poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to deeply consider all of these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. RE/M/(X- Premie~Pro~r~ies Licensed to Sell Real Estate in the State of Iowa ~ Q,?~ ~ J ~ ,l ~ ,~ Premier Properties Coralville, Iowa 52241 Office: (319) 354-8644 FILED t]05 SEP 15 PH 2:08 CITY bLER · IOWA CITY, IOWA August 30, 2005 Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you not only as a REALTOR® but as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® as well. I am greatly concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City of Iowa City is considering adopting and have outlined the primary concerns below: The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones as proposed by this new code. Increasing the width of residential lots will thus increase the overall cost for development. This overall increase will as a result be passed on to the consumer causing housing to be less affordable. The City of Iowa City should not be granted the power to impose design standards on residential construction. The design of a home should be left to the customers to determine. Developers and Builders will produce products that sell. Telling consumers what they like by enforcing a design standard would be a mistake in our marketplace. The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes may be built. This move would again limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of housing in our market today. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots of RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards. The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but this so called "bonus" is very minimal when compared to the current code. In addition this bonus will also increase the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density would then have to increase simply to cover the cost of these new requirements so that housing could remain affordable. If the City is going to require developer's to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term care, maintenance and repair of these alleys. It is unreasonable, not to mention unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required by the City. Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. > Level H Sensitive Areas should not require use of Planned Development Overlay. The City should automatically refund the Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making substantial changes regarding these concerns will be an extremely poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to deeply consider all of these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Thank You, Licensed to Sell Real Estate in the State of Iowa Premier Properties 1006 $~h Street  -~r-~; .......... Coralville, Iowa 52241 ---- } Office: (319) 354-8644 FILED ?O0 i SEP 15 ?t'I 08 CITY CLERK IOWA IOWA August 30, 2005 Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you not only as a REALTOR® but as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® as well. I am greatly concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City of Iowa City is considering adopting and have outlined the primary concerns below: The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones as proposed by this new code. Increasing the width of residential lots will thus increase the overall cost for development. This overall increase will as a result be passed on to the consumer causing housing to be less affordable. The City of Iowa City should not be granted the power to impose design standards on residential construction. The design of a home should be left to the customers to determine. Developers and Builders will produce products that sell. Telling consumers what they like by enforcing a design standard would be a mistake in our marketplace. The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes may be built. This move would again limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of housing in our market today. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots of RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards. The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but this so called "bonus" is very minimal when compared to the current code. In addition this bonus will also increase the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density would then have to increase simply to cover the cost of these new requirements so that housing could remain affordable. If the City is going to require developer's to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term care, maintenance and repair of these alleys. It is unreasonable, not to mention unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required by the City. Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. > Level H Sensitive Areas should not require use of Planned Development Overlay. The City should automatically refund the Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making substantial changes regarding these concerns will be an extremely poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to deeply consider all of these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Thank You, ~ RE/MAX Premier Properties rlrl 116 r Licensed to Sell Real Estate in the State of Iowa Premier Properties 1006 5th Street ¢~ lforalville, Iowa 52241 ffice: (319) 354-8644 FILED SEP ! 5 2:08 CITY IOWA IOWA August 30, 2005 Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you not only as a REALTOR® but as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® as well. I am greatly concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City of Iowa City is considering adopting and have outlined the primary concerns below: The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones as proposed by this new code. Increasing the width of residential lots will thus increase the overall cost for development. This overall increase will as a result be passed on to the consumer causing housing to be less affordable. The City of Iowa City should not be granted the power to impose design standards on residential construction. The design of a home should be left to the customers to determine. Developers and Builders will produce products that sell. Telling consumers what they like by enforcing a design standard would be a mistake in our marketplace. The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes may be built. This move would again limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of housing in our market today. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots of RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards. The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but this so called "bonus" is very minimal when compared to the current code. In addition this bonus will also increase the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density would then have to increase simply to cover the cost of these new requirements so that housing could remain affordable. If the City is going to require developer's to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term care, maintenance and repair of these alleys. It is unreasonable, not to mention unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required by the City. Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. > Level H Sensitive Areas should not require use of Planned Development Overlay. The City should automatically refund the Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making substantial changes regarding these concerns will be an extremely poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to deeply consider all of these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Licensed to Sell Real Estate in the State of Iowa Premier Properties '1006 $"' Street ~ Coralville, Iowa 52241 Office: (319) 354-8644 FILED SEP 15 PN 2:08 CITY CLERK · IOWA CITY, IOWA August 30, 2005 Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you not only as a REALTOR® but as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® as well. I am greatly concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City of Iowa City is considering adopting and have outlined the primary concerns below: The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones as proposed by this new code. Increasing the width of residential lots will thus increase the overall cost for development. This overall increase will as a result be passed on to the consumer causing housing to be less affordable. The City of Iowa City should not be granted the power to impose design standards on residential construction. The design of a home should be left to the customers to determine. Developers and Builders will produce products that sell. Telling consumers what they like by enforcing a design standard would be a mistake in our marketplace. The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes may be built. This move would again limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of housing in our market today. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots of RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards. The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but this so called "bonus" is very minimal when compared to the current code. In addition this bonus will also increase the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density would then have to increase simply to cover the cost of these new requirements so that housing could remain affordable. If the City is going to require developer's to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term care, maintenance and repair of these alleys. It is unreasonable, not to mention unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required by the City. Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. > Level H Sensitive Areas should not require use of Planned Development Overlay. The City should automatically refund the Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making substantial changes regarding these concerns will be an extremely poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to deeply consider all of these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. ~censed t~ffSell Real Estate in the State of Iowa Premier Properties 1006 5m Street ~_~j.._. Coralville, Iowa 52241 ij I~I~:-~-: Office: (319)354-8644 LEPIC-KROEGER REALTORS® oo 2346 Mormon Trek Blvd. · Iowa City, IA 52246 · (319) 351-8811 CD ~< ~ [---" Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street ~_ ~ Iowa City, IA 52240 cv Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level I! Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature s~p 15 2005 ll:09RM SELLERS&SEEKERS 3193398~0~ p. ] I~a Ci~, IA 5224~ d ~al ~tate Core.ny t~aC~. ~ ~2240 I~ c~C~ I ~ ~~ ab~ ~ ~ ff~si~ ~ ~ p~ ~l~m~ c~id~ n~t~ and ~ out~ ~ p~ ~ b~ow, ~ p~ ~e ~ n "d~ ~u~". but it ~H~s. ~ C~ ~uld ~ ~ t~ ~t ~ ~i~ ~ ~ ~m~ by ~ C~. a~ use ~~ ~ ~ ~ able ~ ~s ~ dte~ ~e ~ ~ ~ ~e L~ D~lopm~ Co~il, lown ~s~tt~ ff ~TORS~ ~d G~ Io~ Ci~ ~ Ho~ B~ ~s~on he.re / '" Iowa City Area Association of REAL TOI EED SEP 1508 Iowa City Council Members Ct~' CLERK 410 IOWA IOWA Iowa Ci~, IA 52240 Iowa CiW Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS~. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the CiW is considering adopting and have outlined my prim~ concerns below. The CiW of Iowa CiW should not impose design stand,ds on residential cons~uction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the Ci~. The CiW should not increase lot wides in residential zones, ~ propo~d by ~e new code. Increasing lot wides increases in~as~cmre costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. The proposed code contains a "densiW bonus", but it is not a si~ificant bonus when compared to the cu~ent code. In addition, ~e densiW bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with desi~ standards. ~e densiW needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our communiW's abiliW to provide one of the most affordable ~es of dwellings. ~e CiW should pe~it zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose desi~ standards on those homes. lfthe CiW is going to require developers to cons~uct alleys in ce~in developments, the CiW should assume the long te~ mainminance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are ~quired to be cons~ucted by the CiW. Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandato~. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings ~d are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessiW of the mandato~ meetings and reposing obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level Il Sensitive Are~ should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. The CiW should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development c~e without making si~ificant changes regarding these ma~ers would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa CiW. 1 encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues ~her with the Land Development Council, Iowa CiW Area Association of REALTORS~ and Greater Iowa CiW Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code.  438 Highway ~ West 3~9-338-fi4fio phone e-mail: icaar~icaar, org Iowa ~, ~ 5224~ 3~-338-fi957 f~ web site: icaar.org REALTO~e Iowa City Area F/LED Association orr EAL TORS ® 280 SEP I 5 PN 2:08 Iowa City Council Members IOWA 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code.  438 Highway I West 3~9-338-646o phone mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR~'~ Iowa City Area Association of REALTO LED Iowa City Council Members CITY CLERK 410 E. Washi. to. Street IOWA CITY, IOWA Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number o£ provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City o£ Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of' homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If'the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of'these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to b~ constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of'developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if'the fees are not used within a reasonable period of'time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature  438 Highway 1 West 319-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org IOwa Cji!l, IA 52246 3~9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR~' Iowa City Area Association ofR F, A LTORS® $£p 15 Pl't 2.: 08 Iowa City Council Members CITy 410E. Washington Street IOWA Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future oflowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature ~h~/Q ff)~_ h~/~  438 Highwag ~ West $~9-$$8-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.or9 IOwa Cit~, IA 52246 $~9-$$8-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR(~ Iowa City Area Association of REAL TORS IL. ED 2:00,5 SEP 15 PH 2: O'/ Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street CITY CLERK Iowa City, IA 52240 IOWA CIT~, IOWA Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature~~~ ~~,4~ --~(/~ ~L rff ~j~/~ ~ ~¢~ rT 438 Highway 1 west 3~9-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 3~9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR~", Iowa City Area Association of R F, ALTORS® Iowa City Council Members 2e; 410 E. Washington Street O ''< Iowa City, IA 52240 ,.~d on F"- IoWa City Council Members: ~ I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · lfthe City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, lowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. signat  438 Highway I West 319-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org IOwa City, IA 52246 3~9-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR* Iowa City Area Association orr EA L TORS ® Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street ~ C) an [--' Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: - I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. ?, r eX_ 488 Highwa~l 1 West 3~9-358-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.or9 Iowa Ci~, IA 52246 319-358-6957 fax web site: icaar.or9 Iowa City Area AssOciation o f REAL TORS i SEP 15 PH 2:07 Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street CITXl/ C~LERK lowaCity, IA 52240 [O~/A ¢IT~ IOWA Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signatur~-~ - . ,~-/ [ 438Highway ~ West 319-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR~ ~ 2ha Street, Ste. 200 Coralville, IA 52241 FILED (319) ~54-0581 Office (319) 354-6432 Fax www.iowarealty.com 200S SEP 15 D 07 C1 ¢ CLERK 4 ~ 0 ~. ~as~¢o~ Strut Io~a Ci~, ~ 52240 Iowa Ci~ Cou~c~ I ~m ~it~ to you as a m~ber of~e Io~a Ci~ ~ Ass~i~tio~ of ~TO~S~. I am conc~ about a number of proVisions ~ the pro~ developm~t c~e that ~e Ci~ is comider~g adopt~g and have outl~ my pr~a~ concerns below. ~e C iW 0f Iowa CiW ShoUld not ~ desi~ smn~ds on residential construction. The d~i~ of hom~' s~uld be ~e Control's d~isio~ not m~&t~ by the Ci~. The Ci~ should not ~crmse lot wi~s ~ r~idential ~nes, as propos~ by ~e new c~e. Incr~s~g lot wid~ ~cr~ses ~as~c~re costs for the develops, which ~cr~es ~e cost to consumers. The'propos~ c~e conings a "d~si~ bonus", but it is not a si~ffi~t ~nus wh~ compar~ m ~e cU~t C~e;, .In addition, the d~i~ bonus ~crms~ ~e cost of hous~g by r~uk~g the d~eloper m comply wi~ d~i~ md~&. The d~siW n~s to ~ ~rms~ m cove.the ~s~ of the r~uk~ents ~d k~ hous~g affor&ble. The propos~ c~e'&astically r~uc~'the ~s built, w~ch l'~tS our co~uniW's abiliW to provide one of the most affordable of dwell~gs. RS-8 zones and'should n~ ~se d~i~ smd~& on ~ose hom~. · ~e Ci~ is going m r~re.d~elo~rs m com~ ~leys ~ ~m devel~ment~ ~e CiW should ~e ~e tong tern mmmce ~d repot of ~eys. It is un-ir to burden resi~nts .of ~ese new sub~hsiom ~ ~e co~ m repair ~d main~n alleys ~at are r~uir~ Nei~borh~ m~gs should be optional not mandato~. A numb~ of developers akmdy use nei~borh~ m~t~gs and ~e able m r~nd dk~tly to ~i~r's . concerns without ~e ~essi~ of~e man&to~ m~t~ ~d re~g obli~tions ~posed by the propos~ c~e. · · Level H Semitive"Mms should not r~uke use of a PI~ Development Overlay. The Ci~ should automatically re,nd Op~ Space f~ to the residents of a subdivision if the f~ are not us~ M~ a r~onable p~i~ oft~e. Adopt~g the propos~ development C~e~out ma~g si~ficant cMnges regard~g these ma~ers w~ld be a poor d~ision for ~e.~e.0f Iowa CiW. I encomge you m comid~ these factors ~d discuss thee issues Ass~iation of ~TORS~ andGtmter Io~ Ci~ ~m Home Builders Ass~iation before vot~g on the propos~ ~e. Lepic-Kroeger, REALTORS® 2346 Mormon Trek Blvd · Iowa City, IA 52246 Phone: 319.351.8811 ~ 1.800.736.6556 · Fax: 319.351.8035 www.lkrinfo.com lowa City Council Members ~1~ _.~ ~ '-['1 410 E. Washington Street O ~ ~ Iowa City, IA 52240 ~_~ © cn ['"-' Iowa City Council Members: ::x ~ I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®~ c:~ .-..d I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City Is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level lI Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Tomlinson Cannon "Since 194~" Gen~r'al Office. 708 E. 2nd Avenue Comlville, IA 5224 (319) 337-2225 September 8, 2005 FAX (319) 337-3959 Cedar Rapids Iowa City Council Members 2351 Blahs Ferry Rd #4 410 E. Washington Street Cedar Rapids, IA 52402 Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 362-1747 FAX (319) 378-1622 Iowa City Council Members: Waterloo/Cedar Falls (319) 234-1223 I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is Call Toll Free considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. (800) 568.4265 · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. Seamless · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the ne~v Aluminum Guttem code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which Basement Wall increases the cost to consumers. Straightening · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of Basement housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs Watexprooting to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. Mudjacking · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of Fore,ration dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- Footing Repair 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. Concrete Sawing · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the & Core Ddllin~ City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions ~vith the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations CD ~.~ imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. ~-~ Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these ~:~ ,7. factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association betbre voting on the proposed code Signature /~i ~- /1/~/~S6> [X Ajfiliated with National Association oJ'Home BuiMers & IIome BuiMers Association of Iowa Tomlinson Cannon "Since 1948" General Office 708 E. 2nd Avenue Comlville, IA 5224 I (319) 33%2225 September 8, 2005 FAX (319)337-3959 Cedar Rapids Iowa City Council Members 2351 Blairs Ferry Rd 410 E. Washington Street Cedar Rapids, IA 52402 (319) 362-1747 Iowa City, IA 52240 FAX (319) 378-1622 Iowa City Council Members: Waterloo/Cedar Falls (319) 234-1223 I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is Call Toll considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. (800) 5684265 · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. Semnless · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new Aluminum Guttm~ code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, ~vhich Basement Wall increases the cost to consumers. Straight, lng · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the cra-rent code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of Basement housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs Waterproofi~g to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing aftbrdable. Mudjacking · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of Foundation dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- Footing R~a/r 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. Concrete Sawing · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the & Core Drilling City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision t73 '=~.~ if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these ~ ~ cr~ ~'~ matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these :~-, ~ ~, factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area ~ ,,~ ~~ Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the p used code.21~ Signature /-/ -7~ ~l,L -'~'-6, ll tl ~ A. ffiliated with National Association oJ'ttome Builders &tlome Builders Association oJ Iowa Tomlinson Cannon "Since 1948" General Office 708 E. 2nd Avenue Coralville, IA 5224 l (319) 337-2225 September 8, 2005 FAX (319) 33%3959 Cedar Rapid~ Iowa City Council Members 2351 Blairs Ferry Rd//4 410 E. Washington Street Cedar Rapids, IA 52402 Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 362-1747 FAX (319) 378-1622 Iowa City Council Members: Waterloo/Cedar Falls (319) 234-1223 I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is Call Toll Free considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. (soo) 5684265 · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. Seamless · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new Ahmainum Gutters code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which Basement Wall increases the cost to consumers. Smtightening · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of Ba~ment housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs Waterproofing to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. Mudjacking · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our conununity's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of Foundation dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- Footing Repair 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. Coner~e Sawin~ · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the & Core Drillh~g City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. ~)~ ~'~ · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. "~ Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these .-< r-- matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these r'~ factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before co voti~on the proposed code. az- Signature ~ ~ ,~[~9,_,l~1~ ~0 ~-~D~c-]~) AJ.]~liated with National Association q£ Home Builders & ltome Builders Association qf lowa Tomlinson Cannon "Since 1948" General Office. 708 E. 2nd Avenue Coralville, IA 52241 (319) 337-2225 September 8, 2005 FAX (319) 33%3959 Cedar Rapids Iowa City Council Members 2351 Blairs Ferry Rd #4 410 E. Washington Street Cedar Rapids, IA 52402 Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 362-1747 FAX (319) 378-1622 Iowa City Council Members: Waterloo/Cedar Falls (319) 23,1-1223 I am ~vriting to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. 1 am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is Call Toll Free considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. (80o) 568-4265 · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. Semnless · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new Almninum Guttet~ code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. Basement Wall Straightening · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of Basement housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs Waterproofing to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. Mudjackfllg · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of Fore, darien dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- Footing Repak 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. Concrete Sawing · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, thc & Core Drilling City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents oft'hese new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that arc required to be constructed by the CID,. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. >'-~ -l'l Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these C) -< ~ - matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these ~C-)~ factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area '~' ~q'~ aa, Association of REALTORS® and ~reater Ioxva City Area Home Builders Association betbre vot~oposed... ~~~c°de' /_ AJfiliated with National Association of Home Builders & Home Builders Association of Iowa Tomlinson Cannon "Since 1948" Gener~ Office 708 E. 2nd Avenue Comlville, IA 52241 (319) 337-2225 September 8, 2005 FAX (319) 337-3959 Cedar Rapids Iowa City Council Members 2351 Blairs Ferry Rd 410 E. Washington Street Cedar Rapids, IA 52402 Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 362-1747 FAX (319) 378-1622 Iowa City Council Members: Waterloo/Cedar Falls (319) 234-1223 I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is Call Toll Free considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. (800) 5684265 · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. Seamless · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new Ahwainum Gutters code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which Basement Wall increases the cost to consumers. Stmigh ,tening · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of Basmnent housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs Waterproofing to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing aflbrdable. Mudjacking · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of Foundation dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- Footing Repair 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. Concrete ~wing · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the & Core Dr/lling City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space Zees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. ~ ~ Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these ~ matters would be a poor decision for the future of Io~va City. I encourage you to consider these C3-4~ ~ factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area . .7..zt ~o~ Association of REALTORS~', and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before "'< ~r~ :~ voting,~~posed code. ~ ~ ::1: ~ignature ~"'-~ c/(2_ ~Xl~cr ~~-'~-~ '~-- AJ.[iliated with National Association of Home Builders & Home BuiMers Association oJ' Iowa Iowa City Council Members _.~ 410 E. Washington St~et Iowa City, IA 52240 ~'~'~ ~?. Iowa City Council Members: ~ c::> I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required t6 be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to reSpOnd directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents ora subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future oflowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. csigga ure- J  11 South Gilbert P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 HBA Phone: (319) 351-5333 Fax: (319) 358-2443 E-mail: hbaofic@cs.com www, iowacityhomes,com HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION Advocates for homeownership b V prom oting standards for quality and affordablility September 8, 2005 '~ Iowa City Council Members "~ 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. ·The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before v~the proposers/ Signatu~/~" 4ffiliated with National Association of Home Builders & Home Builders Association of iowa Iowa City Area Association of REA LTORS® Iowa City Council Members ~ 410 E. Washington Street ~ Iowa City, IA 52240 --< ~'- Iowa City Council Members: ~ ,~, I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Signature  438 Highway I West 319-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org IOwa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR~ Iowa City Area Association of REA LTORS® 'TI Iowa City Council Members ~ '--' 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Sign B 438 Highway I West 319-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52£46 319-338-6957 fax' web site: icaar.org REALTOW" Iowa City Area Association of REA LTORS® Iowa City Council Members .~ ? crt 410 E. Washington Street - ~ --o Iowa City, IA 52240 ~ Iowa City Council Members: co I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use ora Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future oflowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Siign~~'/  438 Highway I West 319-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 5e246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR~ Iowa Cit Area Association ofR TORS ® Iowa City Council Members CD 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintainance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. B 438 Highway I West 319-338-646o phone e-mail: icaar@icaar.org Iowa City, IA 52246 319-338-6957 fax web site: icaar.org REALTOR® FILED CITY ,LER 10WA IOWA August 30, 2005 Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you not only as a REALTOR® but as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® as well. I am greatly concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City of Iowa City is considering adopting and have outlined the primary concerns below: The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones as proposed by this new code. Increasing the width of residential lots will thus increase the overall cost for development. This overall increase will as a result be passed on to the consumer causing housing to be less affordable. The City of Iowa City should not be granted the power to impose design standards on residential construction. The design of a home should be left to the customers to determine. Developers and Builders will produce products that sell. Telling consumers what they like by enforcing a design standard would be a mistake in our marketplace. The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes may be built. This move would again limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of housing in our market today. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots of RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards. The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but this so called "bonus" is very minimal when compared to the current code. In addition this bonus will also increase the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density would then have to increase simply to cover the cost of these new requirements so that housing could remain affordable. If the City is going to require developer's to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term care, maintenance and repair of these alleys. It is unreasonable, not to mention unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required by the City. Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbors concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. > Level H Sensitive Areas should not require use of Planned Development Overlay. The City should automatically refund the Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making substantial changes regarding these concerns will be an extremely poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to deeply consider all of these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. Thank You, _..~~ R~ Premier Properties .,,'f. icensed to Sell Real Estate in the State of Iowa Premier Properties Coralville, Iowa 52241 Office: (319) 354-8644 FILED " ..... P.O. Box 3396 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 Phone: {319} 351-5333 E-mail: hbaofic@cs.com HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION CiTY www. iowacityhomes.corn Advocates for homeownership by promoting standards for quality and affordablility September 8, 2005 Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as .a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code mat the City is ' considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. .. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before ~ voting, on tl~e proposed,code./ ,,, ~ ~ ~ ~ Affiliated with National Association of Horn Builders & Home Builde s ssociatio ~J~towa HBA "' CITY' CLERK,,..,.i,: hb-ofic@c..com Advocates/or homeownership by promoting standards for quality and affordablility Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before ~//on the prolx~d code. Affiliated with National Association of Hotne Builders & Home Builder~ Association of Iowa FILED ~005 SEP 20 Pti 12: 0'/ GTY CLERK IOWA Ct' IOWA GALLERY REALTY September 13, 2005 Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and have outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in whichzero-lot line homes can be built, which limits our community's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS-8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · If the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, the City should assume the long term maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by the City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of the mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before voting on the proposed code. P.O. Box 3396 Iowa Ci~, Iowa 52244 H~ BU~ ~~ CITY , , .... ,.. ,-..,-. by promot~g ~ for qu~ty ~ a~o~li~ Iowa City Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Council Members: I am writing to you as a member of the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. I am concerned about a number of provisions in the proposed development code that the City is considering adopting and outlined my primary concerns below. · The City of Iowa City should not impose design standards on residential construction. The design of homes should be the consumer's decision, not mandated by the City. · The City should not increase lot widths in residential zones, as proposed by the new code. Increasing lot widths increases infrastructure costs for the developers, which increases the cost to consumers. · The proposed code contains a "density bonus", but it is not a significant bonus when compared to the current code. In addition, the density bonus increases the cost of housing by requiring the developer to comply with design standards. The density needs to be increased to cover the costs of the requirements and keep housing affordable. · The proposed code drastically reduces the areas in which zero-lot line homes can be built, which limit our corranunity's ability to provide one of the most affordable types of dwellings. The City should permit zero-lot line homes to be built on interior lots in RS- 8 zones and should not impose design standards on those homes. · ff the City is going to require developers to construct alleys in certain developments, thc City should assume the long texm maintenance and repair of alleys. It is unfair to burden residents of these new subdivisions with the cost to repair and maintain alleys that are required to be constructed by thc City. · Neighborhood meetings should be optional, not mandatory. A number of developers already use neighborhood meetings and are able to respond directly to neighbor's concerns without the necessity of thc mandatory meetings and reporting obligations imposed by the proposed code. · Level II Sensitive Areas should not require use of a Planned Development Overlay. · The City should automatically refund Open Space fees to the residents of a subdivision if the fees are not used within a reasonable period of time. Adopting the proposed development code without making significant changes regarding these matters would be a poor decision for the future of Iowa City. I encourage you to consider these factors and discuss these issues further with the Land Development Council, Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® and Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association before VO~ng on the proposed code. Affiliated with National Associa~ton of Home Builders & Home BuilderJ Association of Iowa Marian Karr From: Bendercl4@aol.com Sent: Monday, September 05, 2005 8:18 AM To: council@iowa-city.org Subject: Construction on Dubuque Street Ladies and Gentlemen' I hope each of you understand the inconvenience and dollar cost that this construction has caused those of us having to traverse this street on a daily basis (time and cost for our vehicles idling for such long periods twice a day). It can take 15-20 minutes daily to begin to "move" on this street. Many many days upon exiting 1-80 you can be at a dead stop in 1-80 waiting to enter the Dubuque Street on ramp. This is an extreme hazard to all of us sitting on I-$0. When several people are killed you will, perhaps begin to push those doing this construction to finish in a timely manner. Might I suggest you have them work two shifts in order to complete this construction. I do question why you did not postpone the last two lanes until next spring when the students have left; eliminating at least some of the traffic that uses this street. At "best" you have a hazardous situation going on right now that needs to be addressed IMMEDIATELY. I ask each and every one of you to try and make this drive at 7:45-50 and again at 5'00-5:30 p.m, for several days and see for yourselves what danger you have caused each of us who drive this route daily, Carol Bender 116 23rd Street Drive, S. E. Cedar Rapidsk, Iowa 52403 319/366-7075 9/6/2005 Marian Karr ~ From: Irvin Pfab [ipfab@avalon.net] Sent: Monday, September 05, 2005 2:41 PM To: council@iowa-city.org Subject: Counseling, housing programs can save lives - and money The ArizonaRepublic Sept. 5, 2005 12:00 AM The Arizona Republic Sept. 5, 2005 12:00 AM A new approach, a new success Counseling, housing programs can save lives - and money Sept. 5, 2005 12:00 AM For decades, the mentally ill homeless have seemed like an intractable problem, one that society could not afford to solve. But the successes of an approach pioneered in California and recently introduced in Phoenix are challenging the conventional wisdom. These programs share two basic elements: · A "one-stop shopping" day center that offers the mentally ill homeless an array of critical social services under one roof, with a cadre of counselors to work with them until they are capable of living in a private residence. This includes helping them get back on prescribed medications, putting them on the path to sobriety, assisting them in obtaining food stamps and other welfare benefits, and aiding them in finding short-term and permanent housing. · "Supportive housing," where one or two people are placed in an apartment setting and are visited regularly, every other day or so, by social workers, nurses, and employment and financial aid counselors. These professionals make sure the residents are taking their medication, eating properly, receiving welfare or veterans' benefits, moving toward finding work if that is an option, and generally building a new life. Those who work with the mentally ill homeless in the Valley say that it has been extremely difficult to keep clients in housing where they were living on their own and did not receive regular support; only 40 percent at most stayed in such settings for more than a few months. In sharp contrast, the vast majority, up to 95 percent, of the Valley's mentally ill who were homeless are staying in housing for more than a year when they are given support services. There are several hundred of these people. "The lesson couldn't be more clear," said Brenda Robbins, housing manager for ValueOptions, the contractor that provides services for Maricopa County's mentally ill poor. "Supportive services are the key to having them stick it out." The programs have for several years produced impressive results in California cities such as Long Beach, Modesto, Sacramento and Santa Ana. Since 2000, those cities have succeeded in moving about 2,100 homeless mentally ill people into supportive housing, more than tripling the number in such housing to 2,966. Of the 98 homeless people with mental illnesses placed in supportive housing in 2002 by the Village, a model program in Long Beach, about 85 percent have remained there for at least two years. The cost of the new approach is steep, and obtaining funding to pay for it is a formidable obstacle. But the cost of the alternative - leaving the mentally ill homeless on the streets, treating them in emergency rooms and trying and jailing them for the steady stream of crimes that they commit - is two to three times higher, according to research in other states and an /Arizona Republic/ analysis of costs associated with the Valley's 1 homeless. It costs at least $30,000 to $40,000 a year to have a homeless person on the streets in the Valley. Studies conducted in other states found that the annual cost per person can run as high as $55,000. But it costs up to $3,000 to prepare a mentally ill person for a private residence or apartment with support services and only about $15,000 to $20,000 a year to house an individual in such a place. "There is an answer. There are solutions. And people who work with the mentally ill homeless are agreeing on the answers and solutions," said Charlene Moran Flaherty, who, until recently, was the coordinator of the state's programs for the homeless. "To get to where we want to go, we need to get agencies working together better, and we need to redirect money we're already spending, not necessarily spend more money in total," said Flaherty, who is now an administrator for the Arizona Department of Economic Security. Failed programs A growing number of social workers, psychiatrists and law enforcement officials are concluding that the approaches that have prevailed for decades are fundamentally flawed. From the 1950s through the 1980s, state mental hospitals throughout the country "deinstitutionalized" hundreds of thousands of mentally ill people. With little or no preparation for the transition, the patients were released and sent to live in group homes, apartments, single-room-occupancy hotels or with relatives. But the group homes often have been chaotic and poorly supervised by staff members who had minimal training to help the mentally ill. They can even be unbearable environments, particularly for the schizophrenic. "For some schizophrenic people, being in a group home, much less a crowded homeless shelter, is absolute torture," said Clark Romans, director of the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill in Arizona, a support and advocacy group. "Their illness amplifies and distorts what for us is normal feedback, and when they are in a group or crowd, it's like one of us being in the center of a construction project." For their part, relatives often were at a loss in knowing what to do. And apartment and hotel settings offered no support at all: A solitary living situation where mental-health professionals are not giving constant assistance in taking medication, finding work and obtaining other necessities is a recipe for failure. As a result, tens of thousands of mentally ill people nationwide walked away from these residences, stopped taking their medications and wound up living on the streets. "Deinstitutionalization was a catastrophe," said Steve Goehring, who works for the Veterans Affairs hospital in Phoenix and counsels homeless, mentally ill veterans. He worked for the state in mental-health services in the 1980s, when people were moved out of Arizona's mental hospital at 24th and Van Buren streets. To obtain critical social services, the mentally ill homeless typically have had to navigate a complex bureaucratic system and travel to different physical locations, tasks that many are incapable of doing. "Often they never get there," said Mark Holleran, director of Central Arizona Shelter Services, a non-profit organization that operates three homeless shelters in the Valley. "And assuming they get to an office, many find it almost impossible to navigate the federal, state, city and county bureaucracies. So they just go sit in the park," he said. Over the years, state, county, city and.private institutions have tried to help the mentally ill homeless. But like the endeavors in most American cities, the efforts in the Valley have been fragmented and disjointed. About 60 public and private agencies are involved in efforts to aid the homeless, including the mentally ill. There have been several attempts in the past 15 years to coordinate these efforts. The 2 Arizona Coalition to End Homelessness was formed in 1991 to raise awareness and educate the public about homeless issues and to be a resource for city, county and state leaders. The Maricopa County Continuum of Care committee was formed in the early 1990s to distribute funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to cities and to coordinate efforts to fight homelessness. And last year, Gov. Janet Napolitano formed the Interagency and Community Council on Homelessness, whose members include the heads of all state agencies that deal with homelessness. It would be too harsh to declare these efforts a total failure. Without them, the situation would undoubtedly be much worse. But people who work with the mentally ill homeless say that many people continue to fall between the cracks and that traditional approaches have been fairly ineffective. This track record has caused them to look for better models. The California model The new approach, a day center that provides integrated social services and helps a mentally ill homeless person make the transition to supportive housing, was pioneered in several California communities. In the late 1980s, after the method had been tried on a small scale in various cities, California's Department of Mental Health turned to the National Mental Health Association of Greater Los Angeles, a non-profit organization dedicated to helping the mentally ill. The department asked the association to design and demonstrate a larger-scale system. The result was the MHA Village in Long Beach, which began operations in 1990 and now is considered a leading model. The Village provides extensive psychiatric and counseling services exclusively to the mentally ill who are homeless or are leaving jail. The center offers seating areas, bathrooms, showers, post office boxes and telephone- message services. Social workers, psychologists, financial-aid counselors, substance-abuse counselors and housing specialists from government agencies and non-profit organizations are on hand to help clients get off drugs and alcohol, get on medication, obtain medical care, figure out what financial benefits they might qualify for and formulate a plan for a future. The Village's philosophy can best be described as "whatever works." Sometimes, the mentally ill homeless come to the center on their own. Sometimes, they are coaxed in. Outreach teams from the Village cruise parks, vacant lots and alleys, looking for those in need. Encouraged by the Village, police urge the mentally ill homeless to go to the center. Soup kitchens and shelters provide referrals as well. The center's central goal is to get the homeless mentally ill person into supportive housing as soon as possible. Sometimes, it takes several weeks or even months to get the person physically and mentally ready. Sometimes, an individual can be placed right away. Some of the most difficult cases are virtually impossible to place: They may visit the center once or twice and never return. "Supportive" is the operative word for the housing. Successfully housing mentally people who have been living on the streets depends largely on the quality of support they receive once they are in their new homes. The success of the programs in Long Beach and similar ones in communities such as Santa Ana prompted the California Legislature in 1999 to give a $10 million grant to Los Angeles, Sacramento and Stanislaus counties to expand outreach, medical and support services for the mentally ill homeless. The resulting movement of about 300 mentally ill homeless into housing persuaded the California Legislature to expand the program in 2000 to 34 cities with a $55 million budget. And last November, California voters passed Proposition 63, which established an income tax of 1 percent on all individuals' income above $1 million, to fund further programs for the homeless, including the mentally ill. 3 About 35,000 Californians fall into the $1 million-plus bracket, and Stephen Mayberg, director of California's Department of Mental Health, said the tax is expected to generate $700 million annually. The state is still in the process of deciding how this money will be spent. But Mayberg says the wide support for Proposition 63 proves something: "We all walk by {the mentally ill homeless) every day because they make us uncomfortable, but that's not to say that if we're shown a viable solution, we won't support it." Although there is currently no effort to create a similar tax in Arizona, it would generate about $47 million annually. The state's Department of Revenue says there are more than 2,300 households with a gross income of $1 million or more. Phoenix's pilot program The California breakthroughs in treatment of the mentally ill homeless were widely publicized and inspired people like Holleran, director of Central Arizona Shelter Services, to try the approach in the Valley. Holleran, in spring 2004, opened the Day Resource Center, the first and only Valley site to fully use the California "integrated services" model, at 10th Avenue and Madison Street. (See the related story, "Phoenix program achieves initial success" on Page AS.) The center is designed to serve the "chronically homeless," almost all of whom suffer from mental illness, substance-abuse problems or both. The downtown emergency shelter operated by CASS is one block away, and the county's clinic run by Healthcare for the Homeless also is in the neighborhood. Despite its cramped, ancient building, the Day Resource Center has had considerable success in 16 months of operation. It has put about 190 people in supportive housing and reports that more than 90 percent still are there. A new $23 million Human Services Campus, which is opening in November on a 14-acre site near 12th Avenue and Madison Street, will allow the Day Resource Center to serve more people and better integrate services with other providers. The downtown CASS emergency shelter will relocate to the new campus and will continue to house about 400 people. Other service providers on the campus will include the St. Vincent de Paul dining hall, the Healthcare for the Homeless clinic and a small shelter for the seriously mentally ill that NOVA Safe Haven will run. About $7 million of the funding to build the new Phoenix campus came from Maricopa County and about $16 million from federal, state, municipal and private sources. The funds for its annual operating budget of about $1 million will come from grants, gifts and government sources. "We're putting to work here everything we've learned about helping the chronically homeless, most of whom have behavioral health problems," Holleran said. Funding more capacity Holleran and others who work with the homeless say although one new Human Services Campus will be a fine thing, two or three additional but smaller campuses around the Valley plus more supportive housing could move most of the mentally ill homeless off the streets. The obstacle, of course, is money. Homelessness experts, including Holleran and Flaherty, say the campuses wouldn't need to be as extensive as the downtown campus. "What is critical is the 'day resource center' part," Flaherty said. A resource center with smaller shelters and limited dining facilities could be built for about $5 million, she estimated. 4 This means that three more campuses would cost a total of about $15 million to build. Additional supportive housing for the Valley's 3,000 to 4,500 mentally ill homeless would cost about $50 million a year, which includes the cost of buying or leasing the units and providing support services. Existing units in the Valley house approximately 2,700 mentally ill people. Most of this supportive housing is provided by ValueOptions, which has a $490 million annual contract with the state to provide mental-health, housing and other services to about 55,000 poor people in Maricopa County. The vast majority of the 2,700 people had not been chronically homeless but could become so if this housing didn't exist. Organizations and individuals that work with the mentally ill homeless are pessimistic that they will be able to get the state Legislature and local governments to provide the funds for the additional campuses and housing units that are needed. "Mental health-problems of people like the homeless mentally ill-hasn't become enough of an issue with the public for legislators to care," said Phoenix attorney Jim Bush, an advocate for the mentally ill and the homeless. Bush, who has a grown son who has battled schizophrenia for years, knows Arizona's legislators and legislative process well. He has worked as a lobbyist for the mining industry and other businesses and has served on several committees and commissions that have worked with legislators on mental-health issues. "The public looks at the mentally ill, then looks away," Bush said. "The mentally ill are unattractive, act in inappropriate ways. There is public apathy to helping them." The irony is that both research and the experience of people who work with the homeless strongly suggest that the public pays more when the mentally ill are on the streets than when they are in supportive housing. A 2003 study by the Mental Health, Chemical Abuse and Dependency Services Division of King County, Wash., where Seattle is located, found that it cost $1.1 million to serve 20 mentally ill homeless people who were repeatedly arrested, jailed, sent to court, hospitalized or admitted to crisis centers over a one-year period. That's about $55,000 per person. Dennis Culhane, a researcher at the University of Pennsylvania who studied 5,000 mentally ill homeless in New York City, found that each used on average $40,500 a year in shelter, emergency room, hospital and jail expenditures. Culhane did not try to calculate police and court costs. By comparison, the cost of supportive housing runs about $15,000 to $20,000 per person, according to Central Arizona Shelter Services and the Arizona Department of Economic Security. This includes the cost of housing, food and various counseling services. Although studies may prove that it is more expensive for the mentally ill homeless to be on the streets, finding the funding for the new approach is hardly a simple matter. The problem is that the higher cost of the status quo is spread among many entities. "It's not as easy as taking the money from one place you're spending it and putting it into another," said Fred Karnas, Gov. Napolitano's chief adviser on homeless issues. For example, he said, the mentally ill homeless "probably use millions in emergency room services, but once we get them out of the ERs and into medical care, which will be a lot cheaper, the hospitals will use that money for their own purposes, not add it to the effort to help homeless, mentally ill people." Karnas allowed, however, that it may be possible, with some effort, to figure out ways to direct some of the money that is now being spent. For example, he said, it may be possible to use for supportive housing some of the money now spent on keeping the mentally ill homeless in jail. (It currently costs about $15,695 a year to keep a mentally ill person, or any person, in the general jail population and about $54,750 a year in the jail's psychiatric ward. The annual rent portion of the cost of supportive housing is about $7,500 per person in the Valley.) "There are ways, if we can get entities and departments, like the jails and the Department of Housing and the Department of Economic Security working together, that we can better use money we're already spending," Karnas said. This is one of the missions of the new Interagency and Community Council on Homelessness. But Karnas thinks that even with such cooperation, more tax dollars will be needed. Creating more supportive housing for about 3,000 people "is going to cost more money than we're going to find without legislative help and help from the private and public sector," he said. That is, getting the mentally ill homeless into resource centers and then into supportive housing would require more tax dollars, which means the Legislature would have to raise taxes or cut funding for other programs. Persuading the Legislature Pete Hershberger, a Tucson Republican who heads the Human Services Committee of the Arizona House, says that "an attitude change" will be necessary for the Legislature to come up with more money to help the mentally ill homeless. "Some members just don't think government has a role to play in this sort of thing," he said. "But I would like to think that the deaths this summer from the heat among these poor people will make a difference. We'll find out when we get to budget time next year." Susan Gerard, director of the Arizona Department of Health Services, is more optimistic. She believes that the Republican-dominated Legislature might be willing to provide more funds if presented solid proof that the new approach works. A moderate Republican who served in the Legislature from 1988 to 2002, Gerard often bucked conservative colleagues by supporting more funding for mental-health care. "Too often it seemed like money (for programs to help the mentally ill homeless) was not well spent," she said. "Nothing seemed to be working very well. But if you can show a track record, then you have a good chance of getting support from the Legislature." Mayberg, director of California's Department of Mental Health, says the strides that his state has made in funding programs for the homeless show that the public can be mobilized. There are two keys to winning it over, he said. One is to help people connect personally to the problem when pushing for funds. "What we found is the public cares about the issue of the homeless mentally ill once they understand that these folks are their relatives, perhaps once their neighbors," he said. 6 Mayberg said that research his department sponsored found that 50 percent of people interviewed had a family member "who had experienced the impact of mental illness and felt that the services were inadequate." "It was an issue that struck close to home," he said. The second key is proving to the public that the problem can be solved, that their tax dollars will be well spent, Mayberg said. The public "has every right to expect results," he said. "But we have been able to show that this difficult population to treat is responding to effective treatment and we are reducing homelessness among them." Christopher Jencks, a Harvard professor of social policy who wrote a 1994 landmark book, /The Homeless/, says that the public would welcome a program that works. "Will people support some new program that takes some money? If they think it is going to work," he said. "If they read a story and see a success, a lot of people will sign on." Holleran of CASS says the new Human Services Campus will help show the public that the mentally ill homeless can be helped, that they can be taken off the streets and out of the parks and emergency rooms, and can be led into decent lives. He said that with three or four more campuses around the Valley and with supportive housing for people who have used the counseling services in the campuses, "we could go a long way toward solving this problem." "We can do it," Holleran said. "We just have to want to do it." *Copyright <http://www.azcentral.com/help/articles/info-privacy.html> © 2005, azcentral.com. Ail rights reserved.* Marian Karr From: Dave Collins [DaveCollinsl@mchsi.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2005 5:36 AM To: cou ncil(~iowa-city.org Subject: Two sides to every story Wal-Ma~.pdf (38 Untitled AEachment KB) Dear Council Members Please read the attached article about Wal-Mart 's relief efforts in New Orleans which appeared in today's Washington Post. Perhaps we should be more concerned about keeping some of the new bars out than we are about Wal-Mart. Dave Collins *** eSafe scanned this email for malicious content *** IMPORTANT: Do not open attachments from unrecognized senders Wal-Mart at Forefront of Hurricane Relief Page 1 of 2 washin[Itonpost.com Adv~'~i~e men~ Wal-Mart at Forefront of Hurricane Relief By Michael Barbaro and Justin Gillis Washington Post Staff Writers Tuesday, September 6, 2005; D01 At 8 a.m. on Wednesday, as New Orleans filled with water, Wal-Mart chief executive H. Lee Scott Jr. called an emergency meeting of his top lieutenants and warned them he did not want a "measured response" to the hurricane. "I want us to respond in a way appropriate to our size and the impact we can have," he said, according to an executive who attended the meeting. At the time, Wal-Mart had pledged $2 million to the relief efforts. "Should it be $10 million?" Scott asked. Over the next few days, Wal-Mart's response to Katrina -- an unrivaled $20 million in cash donations, 1,500 truckloads of free merchandise, food for 100,000 meals and the promise of a job for every one of its displaced workers -- has turned the chain into an unexpected lifeline for much of the Southeast and earned it near-universal praise at a time when the company is struggling to burnish its image. While state and federal officials have come under harsh criticism for their handling of the storm's aftermath, Wal-Mart is being held up as a model for logistical efficiency and nimble disaster planning, which have allowed it to quickly deliver staples such as water, fuel and toilet paper to thousands of evacuees. In Brookhaven, Miss., for example, where Wal-Mart operates a vast distribution center, the company had 45 trucks full of goods loaded and ready for delivery before Katrina made landfall. To keep operating near capacity, Wal-Mart secured a special line at a nearby gas station to ensure that its employees could make it to work. Wal-Mart has much to gain though its conspicuous largesse -- it has hundreds of stores in Gulf Coast states and an image problem across the country -- but even those who have to learn more criticized the company in the past are impressed. "Wal-Mart has raised the ante for every company in the country," said Adam Hanft, chief executive of Hanft Unlimited Inc., a New York branding and marketing firm. "This is going to change the face of corporate giving." Wal-Mart, in turn, has been showered with praise. Scott, Wal-Mart's folksy chief executive and its chief defender against a chorus of critics, has appeared on "Larry King Live" to discuss the chain's response to the storm and was singled out by former presidents George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton during a joint news conference yesterday in Houston. Clinton, who is leading a hurricane relief fundraising effort with Bush, said he hoped Wal-Mart's plan to allow relocating employees to take jobs at Wal-Marts across the country "will give some guidance to our members of Congress." The praise comes at a time when the chain faces a series of lawsuits over allegations of wage-and-hour-law violations and gender discrimination. But the chain's huge scale is suddenly an advantage in providing disaster relief. The same sophisticated supply chain that has turned the company into a widely feared competitor is now viewed as exactly what the waterlogged Gulf Coast needs. The Bentonville, Ark., company is rushing to set up mini-Wal-Marts in storm-ravaged areas, handing out clothing, diapers, baby wipes, toothbrushes and food. With police escorts, it delivered two truckloads of ice and water into New Orleans. It is shipping 150 Internet-ready computers to shelters caring for evacuees. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2OO5/O9/O5/AR2005090501598_pf.... 9/6/2005 Wal-Mart at Forefront of Hurricane Relief Page 2 of 2 During a tearful interview on "Meet the Press" on Sunday, Aaron F. Broussard, president of Jefferson Parish in the New Orleans suburbs, told host Tim Russert that if"the American government would have responded like Wal-Mart has responded, we wouldn't be in this crisis." Not everything has gone perfectly for Wal-Mart. Several of its New Orleans stores were looted, and 126 of its stores in the region have been closed at some point. About 20 remain that way. "We did not try to stop the looting or take merchandise out" of the stores, company spokeswoman Mona Williams said in an e-mail. Scott, who said he began to grasp the severity of the storm as he watched TV at home in with his wife last week, said he now participates in two daily conference calls dedicated to the hurricane, one at 7:30 a.m., the other at 5 p.m. The challenges that arise during these calls, he said during an interview, include such matters as how to supply police officers with clean underwear and how to pay Gulf Coast Wal-Mart employees suddenly scattered across the country. "We have an infrastructure that allows us to react," Scott said last night. Asked what motivated the chain's relief efforts and how he thought critics would respond, Scott said: "We have never claimed to be flawless. But on the other hand, we have always demanded that we as a company do care. If anything, this week has shown we do care." He said: "We can't do any more than our own part. We are not the federal government. There is a portion we can do, and we can do it darn well." As Katrina's winds were still dying down last week, preparations at the Brookhaven distribution center ensured that goods desperately needed by ravaged sections of the Gulf Coast started appearing on Wal-Mart shelves. At the nearby gas station that had set up a special line for Wal-Mart workers, the general manager of the distribution center, Brent Hinton, pumped gas for nearly seven hours to keep up employee morale. Referring to his colleagues at the distribution center, Hinton said yesterday, "We have become relief workers." Cliff Brumfield, executive vice president of the Brookhaven-Lincoln County Chamber of Commerce, said he was impressed with Wal-Mart's preparations. "They were ready before FEMA was," he said. Gillis reported from Brookhaven, Miss. ~ ~005 The Washi~gtpn Pps[ Cpmpany Advertising Links Vvhat's this? Groundbreaking NASDAQ Index Program Averaging +37.8% annually, Index-Timing achieves remarkable performance consistency by profiting from short- term price swings. Learn how to participate in this proven management system. www.index-timing.com Day Trader Heaven Only $0 Real time streamed quotes, streaming charts, trades, news, alerts, busy chat rooms, stock sieves. US and UK markets, including NASDAQ. www.advfn,com Trade Wall Street: NYSE Trader Trades start as Iow as $6. Online trading to the NYSE/AMEX/NASDAQ. Free two week tdal demo account. nysetrader.com http://www~washingt~np~st.c~m/wp~dyn/c~ntent/artic~e/2~~5/~9/~5/AR2~~5~9~5~ ~ 598-pf.... 9/6/2005 Marian Karr ~ From: Jeff Edberg [jeff@icrealestate.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2005 11:04 AM To: council@iowa-city.org Subject: Open house event invitation for the Peninsula neighborhood Dear Mayor and Councilors, You are cordially invited to an open house / bar-b-que at the Peninsula Neighborhood on Foster Road just past the Elks Club. This will be held from 12:00 to 5:00 p.m. on September 18, 2005. The City planners, traffic, forestry and other officials that have been helpful will be invited, and there will be food and music. The Press Citizen will also send a reporter to cover this important event! Anyone in Iowa City is welcome. I have attached a flyer to this email with the details. Thank you for your continued support of this project. I'll see you there! Jeff Edberg, ABR, CRS, CCIM, SIOR Broker / Owner Coldwell Banker Real Estate Professionals licensed to sell real estate in Iowa 319.887~7210 -o 319.331.6187 -c 319.351.0124 -f 319.339.0337 -h eSafe scanned this ema~l for malicious content IMPORTANT: Do not open attachments from unrecognized senders 9/7/2005 Moses Bloom Row Houses Lofts on Founder's Square $229,000 - $239,000 $165,000 - $197,000 Come to the party! Q]e'll have bar-b-que sanduJiches From Haijht's Meat MarKet, music by Ben ~;'chmidt, and Friends to meet. Here is a chance to Visit this neuJ urbanist nei=Ohbor- hood and see the diFFerence For your- 1075 Foster Road $465,000 selF. ~'aFe, sylvan, secure, ClOSe. 1036 Foster Road $347,000 Where: ..... Peninsula Neighborhood on Foster Road, past the Elks Club, just off North Dubuque Street (under construction) When: ...... Sunday, September 18th from 12:00 pm to 5:00 pm What: ...... An open house showing off the homes with lots of food and fun Who: ....... Interested people, city officials, Peninsula 1072 Foster Road residents, YOU! $427,000 Offered by: Real Estate Jeff Edberg, ABR, CCIM, CRS, SIOR Professionals 319.887.7210 319.351.3355 jeff@icrealestate.com www. cbrep.com www. icrealestate.com Marian Karr From: jean-villarreal@uiowa.ed u Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2005 3:02 PM To: council@iowa-city, org Subject: We can do better than this! Below is a letter to the editor for The Daily Iowan that I wrote. Please explain the reason behind the feeble contribution that Iowa City is making (or not making) by allowing hurricane evacuees to be placed at the top of the list for subsidized housing in the area. I was appalled to read in Wednesday's "Official: Victims may come to IC" that Gov. Tom Vilsack, one of the last state governors to offer aid, according to the national news, will place evacuees at the top of subsidized housing lists in Iowa City. Translation: the most economically disadvantaged in Iowa will contribute, involuntarily and after 2 years of waiting, their opportunity at affordable housing in the Iowa City area. This isn't the Iowa I know and love. My Iowa is the University's efforts to continue educational opportunities, the school-children's selling of bracelets, the people who have left their families behind to volunteer at shelters across the south. How dare the rest of you pacify your consciences and pat yourselves on the back by making a contribution that is not a contribution at all! There is more than enough financial resources in this area to make a real contribution to rebuilding the lives of those affected by the hurricane. But since many of you don~t get it, let me spell it out for you. If you don't have to rely on government programs to give your children the most basic nutritional needs, and your closet is not full of second-hand thrift store clothes, you can afford to contribute. If you drive a car less than 5 years old, go out to dinner once a week, have air conditioning, more than one phone number, or can afford to send your children to college without need-based financial assistance, you can contribute. Don't pass the buck to the economically disadvantaged so that you sleep better tonight. Contribute! Jean Villarreal U of I SW student 319-353-4738 627 Hawkeye Court Iowa City, Iowa 52246 Marian Karr From: Scot West [srichardwest@yahoo,com] Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2005 4:30 PM To: council@iowa-city.org Subject: Dorothy To the members of the Iowa City City Council: It has come to my attention through the September 6 of the Daily Iowan that there has been a request to remove the sculpture "Dorothy" from the Ped Mall. While common sense tells me that Patrick Arnett's emotional sensitivity are neither the fault of the sculpture nor the concern of the Iowa City Public Art Program, let me go on record as saying that "Dorothy" is possibly the most interesting piece of all the public art on the Ped Mall. Iowa City hosted (and continues) to host an army of Herky statues recently. I think our delicate constitutions are all healthy enough to withstand a single cyclone. Best, Scot West "Frango ut patefaciam." Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort. http://store.yahoo.com/redcross-donate3/ PATV ~ Public Access Television Contract (3 pages) Amendments for City Council Consideration 1. The Board of Directors for Public Access Television must be democratically elected by the members of PATV to serve 2 year terms. Unlimited re-election would be available. Paid staff members and their families could not serve on the Board of Directors. 2. 60% of the funding from Iowa City must go to directly benefit the community via equipment maintenance, replacements and upgrades, increased educational programs and longer hours available to public. Staff wages, salaries, and benefits are not to be included in this amount. 3. Staff salaries and benefits must not exceed a total of 40% of public funding. Any monies raised additionally by PATV as a result of their own efforts may be used to increase salaries, benefits and numbers of employees. 4. Public Access Television's hiring policy for who becomes a paid staff member must revolve around unbiased testing for relevant skill and knowledge levels surrounding the telecommunications industry. Applicants would be required to complete a series of demonstrative skill and knowledge tests with the highest scores being considered for the job. In the event of ties, a lottery system would be employed. 5. Public Access Television's contract with the city must be reviewed in 4-year increments by the Iowa City-City Council to allow for citizens as well as the city council to evaluate the performance of the provider and to debate any future amendments and policies that may arise. 6. Membership to Public Access Television must be allowed for all residents of Iowa City to include homeless people who may not have a street address. 7. Membership Fees and Workshop fees must be waived for people who can truthfully demonstrate financial hardship and need. Work study programs would be utilized to allow individuals to work off the fees including the membership fees. 8. Business hours must begin no later than 10 am in the morning Monday thru Friday and finish no earlier than 10 pm at night from Monday thru Friday. Saturday and Sunday are recommended as well because of the public's increased availability during weekend times. 9. PC computers as well as Macintosh computers along with their respecti~.~e~ditin~ software programs must both be made available for use by the public. 1~ ~clu~l~e operating system may be used. ~..~-<_~ ~, .,,, -----4 q) vo 1 PATV (Explanatory notes for above items) 1. 78% of the total budget for Public Access Television Inc. comes from the city of Iowa City. Since over 3/4 or their funding is from public sources, democratic ideals and procedures must be promoted and required to insure fair and due process. At present the Board of Directors is chosen amongst themselves. By allowing the members of PATV to directly choose members of the Board of Directors it would better reflect the needs and changes of the constituency (PATV members) whom the public funding is designed to serve. Long term cronyism and entrenchment would be reduced giving way to new and exciting changes within the PATV community to better serve the community as a whole. 2. $15,500 per month is dedicated by the City of Iowa City to Public Access Television. This comprises roughly 78% of their total budget. Currently staff wages and salaries comprise dose to $17,000 per month. 5full time stqff are employed with full medical and dental benefits paid out to each of them. The total operating income for PATV in the month of June was approximately $20,000 dollars with $15,500 coming from the city. By dedicating a certain percentage of the budget to the needs of the television station itself and not the benefits and wages for employees we can better insure that funds are reaching the people of Iowa City and not subsidizing 5 individuals. The 60% dedication is a rough estimate suggested to offset the present ratio of approximately 85% of the total monthly budget paying staff salaries and benefits. This amount may be adjusted by the council where they see fit with the idea of protecting the citizen's rights to have the majority of those funds allocated to programs and equipment that directly benefits the public. 3. (see line 2) 4. I am concerned that since 78% of the funding for PATV comes from the public and since such a large percentage of that goes to pay fairly healthy salaries and benefits for staff members $37,000 for Executive Director with 4 full time employees average salary $19,900 each with medical and dental benefits--who is allowed on the team should be of concern for the city council. By enacting unbiased skill and knowledge assessment tests to become the determining factors for who is hired we can insure two things. 1) The personnel who are hired are the brightest and most competent for the position they are filling. 2) We can eliminate any preferential treatment (favoritism), bias, prejudice or discrimination that may occur as a result of the Executive Director being exclusively in control of who is hired. Again since the board of directors is presently not elected by the people themselves entrenchment and favoritism are likely factors in determining who wins awards at PATV under the current administration. It is a realistic fact of life that when someone sits before an employer they are judged on personal characteristics. By hiring someone solely on the basis of their skill and knowledge l~els we insure the right person is hired for the job and not the most attractive, charming or ~rr~t~mp~]~it and amicable with the present .... administration. I was even leaning towards having stdt~m~mb~. "-l-I serve 2 year terms much hke the board of directors to insure other people in the com~f~an_l'ty would have a chance to work at the television station and reduce long term entrench _r!~ r~! -o i-f-i 5. By keeping the contract to 4 years with review it insures accountability to the taxpa~rs by th'~ particular provider. This give the city council a chance to review terms and hear com~aints, suggestions, or testimonies from the citizens themselves who may agree or disagree with the service that has been provided for them. 10 year terms are too long in this author's opinion and PATV could lead to lesser quality of service for the people of Iowa City ifPATV knows it is solid for a decade or longer for funding. 6. Many people are homeless yet reside full time in the city of Iowa City. They should be granted opportunity to use the facilities at PATV without discrimination as to their social or economic standing. Many people for philosophical or religious reasons do not maintain physical street addresses. 7. For people who cannot pay they should be allowed to work their fees off. This is self explanatory. 8. For having presently 5 full time employees with a combined full time hour log of 200 hours the present hours are too liberal and relaxed. It has been suggested to me by knowledgeable insiders that PATV does not need to have 5 full time employees to insure its operating success. If they are going to retain 5 full time employees we the citizen's should see an increase in service and availability. I personally would like to see greater emphasis on education programs for the public. The workshops they offer are too short lived and not in-depth enough to adequately train a citizen on the complexities of the telecommunications equipment they find themselves challenged with deciphering. 5 full time staff should have no problem teaching ongoing classes yet they are not. 9. Presently only Macintosh computers are employed at PATV. Many of us citizen's have PC computers as well. PATV has forsaken this and gone exclusively with MAC. This should change. They have plenty of money to put both systems in use. Adobe Premiere makes competent video editing software that is comparable to Final Cut Pro which is utilized exclusively on MAC's. Dear City Council, I have provided the above suggestions for you to consider because I feel that at present PATV does not deserve to be given a lengthy contract from the city until the above concerns are adequately addressed. If you would like to contact me regarding any of these matters please do so without hesitation as the time is drawing near for when you may be signing a contract with PATV Inc. I have come into awareness regarding these matters late but feel them important enough to bring to your attention. Submitted by .~.~~~jvl,(fTL Peter G. Lagio (Equality for CitYzens) Solar nation~yahoo.com 319-936-54447- 3 Marian Karr From: Benton, Daniel [daniel-benton@uiowa.edu] Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2005 7:57 AM To: Jones, Phillip E; council@iowa-city.org Cc: Nelson, William R; Hauserman, Nancy R Subject: Followp: RE: Public nuisance: Fraternity house at NE corner of Ronald and Dubuque Streets Last night, Wednesday Sept. 14, 2005, starting at approx. 10:30 pm and lasting for about 45 minutes, there Was what sounded like a near-riot involving perhaps 50-100 people at the above-referenced address. I don't understand how you can allow this kind of nuisance to continue - it is inconceivable that if It were in the proximity of your house you would tolerate it. From: Jones, Phillip E Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 9:03 AM To: Benton, Daniel Cc: Nelson, William R Subject: RE: Public nuisance: Fraternity house at NE corner of Ronald and Dubuque Streets Mr. Benton, I am having our staff look into this issue and we will report back two you by Friday of this week. Thank You PEJones From: Benton, Daniel Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2005 5:28 PM To: Jones, Phillip E Subject: FW: Public nuisance: Fraternity house at NE corner of Ronald and Dubuque Streets Mr. Jones, FYI if you can pass this on to the University office concerned with fraternity issues. Thank you. From: Benton, Daniel Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2005 3:12 PM To: council@iowa-city.org Subject: Public nuisance: Fraternity house at NE corner of Ronald and Dubuque Streets I am writing to ask for your assistance in stopping the public nuisance which is the fraternity house located on the NE corner of Dubuque and Ronalds streets in Iowa City. The occupants of this building create noise, both in the daytime and nighttime, that makes it impossible for occupants of residential dwellings more than one block away, to work and rest. The oocupants of this building play amplified music and also shout (occasionally using obscene language) at a very high decibel level. I have called the Iowa City Police Department repeatedly who promptly respond to my complaints; however within a short period of time the occupants once again become intolerably noisy (after temporarily becoming quiet in response to the police presence). It is outrageous that such a nuisance is tolerated in a residential neighborhood. Yours truly, Daniel Benton 729 N. Linn Street Iowa City, IA 52245 TEL: 319-354-9692 e-maih daniel-benton@uiowa.edu 9/15/2005 Marian Karr Fro m: sarah-traeger@u iowa. ed u Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 12:10 AM To: council@iowa-city, org Subject: Hurricane Katrina Fundraiser Fundraiser LEer.doc (26 KB) Dear Mr. Lehman, I have attached an important letter from the UI School of Social Work pertaining to an upcoming Hurrican Katrina Fundraiser. Sincerely, Sarah Traeger UI Graduate student eSafe scanned this email for malicious content IMPORTANT: Do not open attachments from unrecognized senders Dear Mr. Lehman, My name is Sarah Traeger and I'm a graduate student in the School of Social Work here at the University of Iowa. I am representing the School of Social Work's two student organizations, Graduate Social Work Student Association (GSWSA) and Social Work Student Association (SWSA). We are collaborating with Diamond Dave's Restaurant in order to hold a fundraiser for the Hurricane Katrina survivors that have been displaced to the Iowa City area. Several families and 11 students have already been relocated to the Iowa City area and more are anticipated to arrive in the near future. As you may already know, there has been an overwhelming response to this great need. However, more assistance is needed, especially since winter is just around the comer and these families have very little to prepare for the cold Iowa weather. My goal of writing to you is to gain support through volunteering, appearing, or donating items that can be auctioned off at the event. Ideally, volunteers are asked to attend from 4:30-9:30, however even a portion of this time would be greatly appreciated and helpful. The members of GSWSA, SWSA, and the staff of Diamond Dave's believe that having your support as an important city leader and local celebrity, can and will make this fundraiser very successful. So I ask you to please accept this invitation to make a huge impact on the lives of these displaced people. All is takes is a few hours of your time, attending the event, or even donating items for the auction. HURRICANE KATRINA FUNDRAISER DIAMOND DAVES RESTAURANT AT THE OLD CAPITAL MALL Monday, September 26 5pm-9pm Proceeds from food, drinlis, tips, raffle and silent auction will directly benefit the hurricane evacuees in the Iowa City area. Please contact me ASAP for further information, or if you would like to volunteer, attend, donate, or provide any other means of support. I would like to include in advertising the names/departments of those who will be assisting with the event. My email address is: sarah-traegerCq_,uiowa, edu Thank you very much for your time and consideration, Sarah Traeger Coordinator of the Hurricane Katrina Fundraiser Page 1 of 1 Marian Karr From: Marian Karr Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2005 8:13 AM To: 'sarah-traeger@uiowa.edu' Subject: Hurricane Katrina Fundraiser Thank you so much for the information and invitation to the Hurricane Katrina Fundraiser at Diamond Dave's next Monday evening. However, Council has a scheduled meeting that evening and will be unable to attend. Please accept my personal best wishes on your fundraiser. Ernest Lehman Mayor 9/20/2005